This is how the parties want to solve the refugee question

Look at the party programs

This is how the parties want to solve the refugee question

Or not?

And to stay in Merkel’s jargon, she said something very unalterable back then: the facts were created, the people were there. So you had to do it. “Germany is a strong country. The motive with which we approach these things must be: We have accomplished so much – we can do it!” were her exact words at the time. Then came New Year’s Eve in Cologne and the first doubts. And not only since the attack in Solingen has it become clear: there is a problem, and a fairly large and complex one, if it is only one.

Reading tip: RTL survey: Immigration offices are groaning under the workload

The government’s security package fails

The traffic light coalition had to react. Interior Minister Nancy Faeser (SPD) ordered stricter border controls and 28 criminals were deported to Afghanistan. The minister also presented a security package. This package essentially contains two laws. On the one hand, the “Law to improve internal security and the asylum system”, and on the other hand, the “Law to improve the fight against terrorism”. The former includes, among other things, a tightening of gun laws. Federal states can set up weapons ban zones and the carrying of knives in public spaces is restricted. The “Act to Improve Counter-Terrorism” is intended to make it easier for the Federal Criminal Police Office (BKA) to identify suspects through automatic data comparison and facial recognition. And it allows the federal police to carry out checks in weapons-prohibited zones.

Both laws passed the Bundestag, but the second one also had to be passed by the Bundesrat, but did not receive the required absolute majority. The countries in which the Union is part of the government voted against or abstained. The law does not go far enough for the CDU and CSU; they submitted their own application, which was ultimately rejected. While the “Law to Improve Internal Security and the Asylum System” can come into force, the second is still being debated and the outcome is uncertain. But where and how do the parties differ from each other? The proposals range from a “right to remain for everyone” (Die Linke) to the complete rejection of permanent immigration (AfD).

The suggestions and demands of the individual parties in the overview

SPD

The SPD wants to create more opportunities for migrants who want to work in the EU to immigrate legally. The party also calls for more legal access routes for refugees. It relies on the UN’s so-called resettlement programs. In order to become part of a resettlement program, a refugee must meet certain requirements (recognition of refugee status, special need for protection). The SPD rejects outsourcing EU asylum procedures to third countries.

When protecting the EU’s external borders, the SPD demands compliance with all humanitarian and rule of law regulations, and human rights violations must be investigated and prevented.

On the subject of the right to remain and deportation, the SPD parliamentary group says: Anyone who does not need protection and has no prospect of remaining must leave Germany. This especially applies to criminals and dangerous people. The aim is to make it easier to establish the identity of criminals and those at risk.

CDU

In its paper “Answers to central questions in current asylum and refugee policy,” the party sees Germany in “an ongoing, severe migration crisis.” In order to cope with this, the Union is calling, among other things, for a stop to accepting asylum seekers from Syria and Afghanistan, as well as the deportation of Syrians and Afghans who are obliged to leave the country. Refugees who travel to their home country should lose their protection status. Such a trip proves that they “have no fear of persecution.”

The Union also calls for permanent border controls, the rejection of illegal entries, as well as the consistent deportation of people who are obliged to leave the country and an unlimited exit arrest

ALLIANCE 90/THE GREENS

In their issue paper “Shaping Immigration,” the Greens are committed to the “fundamental and human right to asylum.” People “from war and persecution […] Those who have to flee should find protection in Germany and Europe.” This requires more legal options for safe entry and a quick and fair asylum procedure. Voluntary return should take priority over deportation. There should be “Europe-wide, open-ended and independent return advice”.

The Greens are in favor of controls at the EU’s external borders. These must “in any case take place in compliance with human rights”. People who do not receive a right of residence should “leave the country again quickly”. However, it should be ensured that the relevant states respect “constitutional principles in dealing with refugees”. Deportations should not be made to war or crisis areas.

All EU states should ensure that everyone who seeks protection in Europe finds “living and humane conditions” and “rule of law standards”.

FDP

The Liberals are committed to a critical review of the causes of flight in the asylum process. Anyone who has no chance of being granted the right to remain in the EU should, if possible, not enter the country at all. Irregular migration should be reduced through faster asylum procedures and consistent deportations. Voluntary departures should be more strongly encouraged.

The FDP wants to temporarily extend border controls at the German borders. It must be ensured that “refugees and migrants who have already stayed in a safe third country return there”. It should also be deported to Syria and Afghanistan. Departure centers are to be set up at major German airports.

The FDP considers the social benefits for asylum seekers to be too high and therefore too attractive. They should be corrected downwards and people who are required to leave the country should no longer receive any social benefits.

THE LEFT

The Left is committed to the Geneva Refugee Convention and to the right to asylum. All people with uncertain residence status should be given the right to remain in Germany after five years at the latest. Instead of repeatedly extending the toleration status of some refugees (chain toleration), they should be offered a permanent perspective.

The party rejects the Common European Asylum System and describes it as a “moral declaration of bankruptcy and a caving in to the right-wing forces in Europe”. It worsens the situation at the external borders and disenfranchises vulnerable people. The Left rejects deportations and demands a right to stay for everyone.

AfD

According to the AfD, “current immigration into our social system far exceeds our financial possibilities.” A long-term stay in Germany must therefore be made dependent on “whether someone earns a living for themselves and their family. Unless there are “actual reasons for protection”. But even these are only “a right of time” and “not a right to permanent immigration”.

People whose asylum applications have been rejected should be deported. The AfD wants to “drastically shorten” the processing of “obviously unfounded asylum applications”. Voluntary departure is preferable to deportation. It is possible that some people could be persuaded to return voluntarily by “granting one-off start-up assistance”.

If necessary, the German borders should be made controllable by “building border fences”. Anyone who wants to enter from a safe transit country should be turned away.

The AfD supports deportations to Afghanistan and Syria, as well as the immediate deportation of all asylum seekers who have been legally rejected. People whose asylum procedures are ongoing should only receive benefits in kind. The AfD believes that in this way it can prevent “illegal immigration from the outset”.

BSW

The Sahra Wagenknecht Alliance is committed to protecting the fundamental right to asylum and stopping uncontrolled migration. In his view, the EU has been failing to come up with sensible and effective regulations for years. The alliance calls for “a fundamental reform of refugee and migration policy”. It relies on “constitutional asylum procedures at the external borders and in third countries”, so protection can really be offered. The procedure can be used by everyone “who has no right to asylum […] and [k]have a perspective of staying and are spared the life-threatening and expensive journey.

People who are required to leave the country should be consistently deported and banned from re-entering the country.

The BSW is calling for the nationwide introduction of a payment card and a reduction in benefits to the constitutionally required minimum subsistence level for those obliged to leave the country in the form of benefits in kind. (wire/battery)

Sources:

Repatriations are made easier | SPD parliamentary group (spdfraktion.de)

FAQ_CDU_Migrationspolitik_2024.pdf (ctfassets.net)

Solutions instead of announcements (cdu.de)

Shaping immigration – ALLIANCE 90/THE GREENS (gruene.de)

For a new realpolitik in migration (liberale.de)

Remigration – Alternative for Germany (afd.de)

Basic program – Alternative for Germany (afd.de)

BSW_Europawahlprogramm_2024.pdf (bsw-vg.de)

Social Democratic Party of Germany SPD (bundeswahlleiterin.de)

ALLIANCE 90/THE GREENS (bundeswahlleiterin.de)

Free Democratic Party FDP (bundeswahlleiterin.de)

THE LEFT THE LEFT (bundeswahlleiterin.de)

Alternative for Germany AfD (bundeswahlleiterin.de)

Alliance Sahra Wagenknecht – Reason and Justice BSW (bundeswahlleiterin.de)

Migration policy EU – European elections 2024 – Election topic refugees – Parties on the topic of escape, asylum, migration – European refugee policy – Election topics in comparison – Topics thought across Europe: What do the parties say? (europawahl-bw.de)