Worth noting that this is a push from the CDU who are leading the government, but their coalition partner the SPD has already come out pretty strongly against this, so it's rather unclear if this would ever actually go through (not to mention challenges from constitutional courts). The CDU cannot unilaterally push through legislation without the SPD.
The SPD has rolled over for the CDU in the past on things, but they've also blocked things they thought were important enough to block, so it's really anyone's guess if this go through (I personally wouldn't bet on it, but I'm sure a bunch of dour pessimists will come explain to me that it's a foregone conclusion and I'm naive).
Let's just remember that spd unironically thought the CumEx expert Scholz should be given the highest position in the government.
After that debacle I honestly cannot understand how anyone with even an iota of integrity can vote for them again and think any of them would ever act in the interests of their people
The slogan "Wer hat uns verraten? – Sozialdemokraten!" has a rather long history. Coined by communist during the 1918 November Revolution, it referenced the social democrats at least tentative support of the suppression of the communist revolution and the murder of Karl Liebknecht und Rosa Luxemburg.
During Weimar times it was popular with both right-wing and left-wing forces. The Nazis - who sent social democrats to the concentration camps - also used it in their propaganda.
As much as I disagree with many of the things today's social democrats say and do, it's worth remembering that this slogan was popularized and predominantly used by anti-democratic forces. It's not a particularly fair thing to throw around carelessly.
Their coalition partner is only publicly against it if there is little chance this criticism has any practical political effect. The SPD as a party is very much in favour of more or less all surveillance laws for citizens, and the contrary for public officials.
Sometimes they pretend otherwise, but only if the above rule applies. Not a dependent partner if you want to preserve freedoms for transparency and against surveillance.
First phrase in the article: "Shortly before the German parliament's summer recess, lawmakers approved a whole series of reforms." Sounds like "done and dusted" to me. The Bundesrat (the second chamber of the parliament) also approved, er... something, but it's not clear to me if it's just the health measures or also the rest. What's left is for the Bundespräsident to sign it, but that's a formality.
And yes, no idea why the SPD is so on board with this - some measures, like having to provide a medical certificate from the first day of an illness (which in practice means you have to go see a doctor personally on the first day of sickness), are definitely not going to increase the dismal approval ratings of this government. So, for example, if you're prone to migraines, until now you would have simply called in sick for a day, now you have to drag yourself to the doctor, only for them to tell you (after potentially hours of waiting) "oh, you do look very pale and sickly today, you probably do have a migraine, here's the certificate. I assume you already took one or several headache pills? Now please, go home and rest."?!
Ok, so what did they actually approve? Is this just a "declaration of intent", and the actual laws will follow later?! The article clearly says "lawmakers approved a whole series of reforms" - I was also surprised that this worked so quickly, but what do I know...
I think the article just has poor wording. They went through a raft of different, unrelated reforms already, and this is part of the next set the CDUs want to get through.
Oh, wow, I have to admit that I didn't know that until today (although I have been living in Germany for 26 years now). I kinda just assumed that they are part of the public broadcasting system financed by the "Rundfunkbeitrag"...
It means that this is a cabinet decision, not (yet) legislation. It still has to go through the Bundestag. Given the opposition within the SPD and the idea being very unpopular among voters, it is not yet clear whether this will actually become law.
It is still very worrying and the unfortunate result of a lot of things going wrong at the cabinet level.
It hasn't even been formally approved by the cabinet. Right now it's just a political agreement between the coalition party. A law still has to be drafted that the cabinet can then submit to the Bundestag.
This seems to be the latest attempt of the conservative CDU to further reduce transparency and accountability of government officials. One could posit the goal is to enable corruption without all that hassle of the media potentially finding out about it.
Poland is now in the Western sphere of influence and it is not in decay. A weak case can be made for Ireland but it’s harder to extract effects of tax haven status. But Poland certainly. Going to be a higher income populace than the UK soon at this rate.
The US is unusual as a federation. Some parts decline, others rise. I think it’s resilient. And every time something goes wrong, America pulls out a magic new technology. We will see if R&D will carry the day again.
And I was in Serbia lately, and while it was not as developed as NW-EU, nobody there described it as decaying (and many said they experiences decay when living in western nations over the past 2 decades).
Controversial proposals like Chat control are often pushed by hard lobby through the current eu presidency state because of their possition. It is likely that if Denmark wasn't heading eu at the time they would have little to do with Chat control. Also likely they were one of the more resilient countries to propose this.
Some people still don't have a clue that it is the almost the entirety of EU member countries in Europe that are rotten and are not doing particularly well.
The only country in Europe that is the exception is Norway which is not part of the EU.
With OP postulating that it is to enable corruption, and a sub-reply affirming that it is therefore the trait of a country in decay, bringing in Serbia as a counter-example is hilarious.
Serbia ranks 116th in the corruption perception index, Germany 10th. (Lower is better)
Corruption perception lags actual corruption. Countries that are becoming more corrupt are perceived as less corrupt. Countries that are becoming less corrupt are perceived as more corrupt.
>And I was in Serbia lately, and while it was not as developed as NW-EU, nobody there described it as decaying (and many said they experiences decay when living in western nations over the past 2 decades)
Yeah, a lot of the western countries that aren't wealthy enough to afford the luxury of indulging in absurd farcical politics and policies over the past 40yr are doing pretty decent.
Why limit yourself to western countries? In fact, why limit it to countries at all? Isn't it the most popular trope of all time to decry the state of today and romanticise yesterday? People have "not been wanting to work anymore" for at least 150 years, things were always better in the olden days, people don't make 'em like they used to, etm.
There's very little value in a statement like yours. It's a truism that has never been correct.
So are you just repeating the parent's flawed argument? Maybe you should see what that comic looks like extrapolated out to 2026: "yo on god writing be dead, frfr no cap <100 emoji> <fire emoji>"
How far back do we take it? In pre-historic times, did people crawl accross the ground to better enjoy it?
There's little correlation between people complaining about something being better in the good old days, and it actualli being better. Not for no reason is "rose-tinted glasses" an expression.
Maybe the other western countries are equally infertile, but just allowed many immigrants in (which counts are population expansion) that also have more children on average.
How are Japan and Korea holing out? They are further down the infertility down-spiral.
Mind you that the names top these lists in spite of usually being present in there in multiple spelling versions. E.g. if all different spelling versions of Muhammad were combined it would top the Dutch statistics as well.
That's because Muslims have their naming concentrated on a single name so much that anywhere you have a sizable number of Muslims, the most popular name in that place is Mohammed, even though most people aren't named Mohammed.
We should be asking why Muslims avoid Warsaw. That's odd.
In context of the article, the economic performance is hardly relevant. The authoritarian forces are still strong in Poland, their institutional damage persistent.
Im really happy for Poland for its growing economy. (though it has the same challenges as Germany roughly speaking)
But You can't just deny the political problems. Propably some Americans do it - to cope with Trump who is worser than any PiS president. Poland has the EU as democratic layer but US with Trump doesnt have it.
Yeah, I am rooting for Poland, but it's simply not a shining example of democratic integrity.
> Poland has the EU as democratic layer but US with Trump doesnt have it.
I mean, let's see. The US thought checks and balances would hold, but they didn't, and the EU didn't prevent Hungary and Poland to slip into authoritarian dynamics to begin with. It's not exactly the legal body drawing the latter two back to change, but economic benefits. And Germany also suffers the same untested myth of "checks and balances", which really assumes some political decency. And no legal construct considered bazillionaire tech bros playing god with our dopamine receptors.
We all shouldn't take democracy for granted. I hope we all start to see the real enemy of the people and find agreement on what's actually important right now. Luckily, causal relations are becoming evident for everyone to see in this critical time. Now people need to start seeing.
I really hope Europe's citizens find unity, a shared identity and a renewed lust for democracy. Quite frankly, here in this libertarian club the EU regulations are not particularly popular, but for me the EU laws are mostly positive and I am a huge fan of the whole thing.
Economic growth is not the kind that's being referred to. I think Germany is also economically growing? It doesn't matter, they are still decaying in most ways.
The Americans who fetishize Poland do it because of their concept of it being 'racially pure' while having a growing economy. They don't particularly care about Ukrainians because Americans don't recognize any racial or ethnic difference between Ukrainians and Poles.
So you are confirming that I'm right in my assertion that the reason you aren't bothered by the Ukrainian refugees in Poland is that you don't see them diluting the racial purity of Poland?
The very consumerism that has made it materially wealthy has fucked up its citizens' priorities. Indeed, because the wealth differential over the last 30 years is as steep as it is - and because people are generally petty - it actually creates a perverse incentive to prioritize wealth accumulation over family life just to "keep up". You don't want the Joneses to outdo you. You don't want to seem shabbier.
So, maybe rapid growth combined with consumerist impulses is a deadly combination for a society. If only rapid growth were combined with healthy and wise priorities...
yep, it's the populists communication strategies winning over the voters so people in power can screw the populace as they like and the spin doctors (not the band) will make people think it's in their interest.
For decades, we have become accustomed to similar anti-constitutional moves from the CDU/CSU. Remarkably, while the German government fails to implement such policies, former CDU chancellor candidate Ursula von der Leyen is pushing them through at the EU level. For some reason, she is now at the helm of the EU. According to German law, anti-constitutional actions are normally considered terrorism.
As a freedom of information officer for a public body in another EU country, I feel that some of these changes such as the restriction of requests to EU citizens are inevitable in my country too.
The volume of FOI requests we get is huge and they are more time intensive than ever, due to the fact most are now written by llms.
I see no reason why the taxpayers of any EU country should be footing the bill for requests from non EU citizens. These requests take a significant amount of public sector resources to compile records and deliver decisions.
Given this, why should a non-EU citizen's request be held in equal esteem to EU citizens'?
It comes down to the intent behind these laws. Is it to provide transparency to the citizens that government are accountable to or is it to provide records/information to anyone from anywhere in the world.
Fully in favour of this and we are making efforts to publish as much of our data publicly as we can. We have set up an open data portal for this purpose.
My country differs from Germany in that our Freedom of Information laws are much broader and allow anyone to request virtually any record held by a public organisation, with the grounds for refusal being narrower. For example, generic day to day email exchanges between low level public officials are requestable and we have to argue why it is against the public interest to prevent releasing them.
While we're trying to publish as much data that is of public interest ad possible, it's proving very difficult to anticipate many of these requests.
In my organisation in particular - we're receiving requests from consultation firms outside the EU on costings for certain services. So we(The taxpayer) are essentially doing their research for them.
Unfortunately, not all data held by an organisation is generated and held in a publishable format.
The data in this example is created incidentally within email chains as part of a broader process.
It's really not cost effective to publish real-time data that's been requested by these firms.
So in principle, I agree that where there is substantial data held that the public are interested in, it should be published. However, it's not feasible or cost effective to publish all data or records held by a public organisation.
Could those email chains be turned into a mailing list available by default, like lkml.org ? Then nothing would need to be done to make it "cost effective to publish".
In reality every public department would need more data staff to collate, prepare and publish data and maintain ownership of it, as a bare minimum. They'd be responsible for accuracy and any mistakes.
Not disagreeing with the idea but it does need funding. So I repeat my question
Wait? They previously allowed everybody and their mother to request the information? Limiting it to ‘citizens of the european union’ seems eminently reasonable.
There is more to it. To request information you have to have some "legitimate interest" which is not yet defined and sounds like an easy way to not give out information.
Also no more NGOs. They were the ones who had the most power to wrestle information out of the hands of rather unwilling parties. The cost of going to court for this would deter most private persons.
Maybe, but the more problematic part is disallowing NGOs from submitting information requests. Multiple previous corruption scandals in Germany were exposed exactly because NGOs themselves were allowed to submit these information requests (and pay for them).
Also with the planned changes, you have to prove that you have an legitimate interest in the information. Which makes the whole thing very vague. So the government can just say that they don't think you have a legitimate interest in the information and deny your request. You would then have to sue.
Also also want to invoice you for all costs that your request causes. Previously it was capped at 500€. So your request could cost you thousands of euros. You are at the mercy of the government how many people are working on your request and how efficient they process it.
> Previously it was capped at 500€. So your request could cost you thousands of euros.
To be clear, it is currently costing the taxpayer said thousands of Euros. Time spent by government workers on FoI requests is meaningful and not free. That does not make them a bad idea, but we should be clear that passing costs on to the requester isn't precisely nefarious?
The transparency of this information is a public good in itself, so it is in the interest of the public that this information can be requested as freely as possible.
Of course there should probably be a way to limit waste, but putting all financial cost onto a single person is a way to effectively limit freedom of information to the point where it contradicts and undermines the whole idea behind it. That's one of the reasons why this change is being proposed, and it is not a stretch to call this nefarious.
Yes, it is costing the taxpayer. However, I think there needs to be some cap, because otherwise the government can weaponize that and be extra inefficient when processing requests for things they don't want to become publicly available.
The current cap of 500€ is a good compromise IMHO: It deters people from issuing unnecessary FoI requests while at the same time keeping it in reach for the average person if they really want that information.
If you design processes to be open by design, the cost of extracting data (removing sensitive data that is indeed not needed) goes down radically. Governments know this and resist it.
There are fees that need to be paid to make a freedom of information request (fees which they also want to jack up), and if an NGO offers to pay that fee so that a native German citizen can make the request, it could be construed as foreign interference.
If the fees are raised, individuals will be less willing to pay out of their own pocket. Even if they aren't raised people are less willing to pay out of pocket compared to an NGO or journalism org that had revenue and budget allotments specifically for that purpose. Assuming NGOs will also not be allowed to directly pay for request fees made by their members/collaborators.
The government has a list of pesky troublemakers to target individually if they prove too annoying? I'm sure the good people of Germany can figure out something to charge someone with.
Such a restriction isn’t patently unreasonable but it would make it more difficult for foreign journalists to do research, and it would add the hassle of requiring individuals to show proof of residence when submitting a request. Anonymous requests under pseudonyms would become impossible.
For what it’s worth, only a handful of US states have a residency requirement for FOIA requests.
The main "purpose" for such information is to be published, and at that point it makes no difference who exactly requested it.
Personal view:
The current mainly governing party in Germany (CDU/CSU) is a bunch of incompetent, nepotistic gerontocrats, and this change is mainly intended to make it harder for independent press to air their dirty laundry.
Just for reference: Approval rating for Merz (chancellor) is under 20% (!!); even Trump is >35%.
I am wondering if a valid aspect of limiting this to people living in Germany could be to prevent Denial of Service attacks from abroad. Of course these could also be launched from Germans...
It's already the case that if you question Israel's right to exist you are considered an antisemitic terrorist and arrested - they are now trying to codify this into an actual law (not just something the police do).
There is no freedom in Germany. The mistakes of the past did not change anyone's mindset about human rights and freedom. They only learned how to put on a facade of caring about them. And they are the most powerful member of the European Union.
I don't think this would pass at all, the German parliament is now in summer break and once they're back there would be 3 federal state elections and depending on its outcome, the current government could collapse before the end of this year.
Lol, do you seriously think the 'alternative' would be any more progressive when it comes to freedom of information (or government transparency in general) once they'd be in power?
There was already a left party in power. It’s called DDR (East Germany). We all know how it ended. Any government with an extremist party is not a good government, regardless it being left or right.
But then again in a democracy the politicians must listen to peoples vote instead of preaching them and if that has happened in Germany, they they would already be having a center right government instead of the current circus
theres a world of difference between a left party, even radical left like die linke, and ddr style communist dictatorship. and i dont like the greens views on nuclear power but they might be the only one who can save germany from afd fascism and cdu family-values flavored petty authoritarianism.
if your definition of center right is fdp then get ready for even more corruption and corporate capture of everything that matters. privatized railways and utilities, anti union laws, unregulated pollution, stagnant wages and the rich getting richer. theres a reason its called the businessmans party.
from an outside pov it looks like there is no center right or center left party that cares about both civil rights and working/middle class economic interests. the only "reasonable" option is the radical left. if someone lives in germany and thinks im wrong please correct me.
I live in Germany and you are wrong. The last green government did a fantastic job with starting the desindustrialization of German economy. If it was up to them we would be living in medieval age. If anyone still votes for the greens, then need to go and get a mental check up.
Radical left is not the reasonable option. Time and time it was provides that radical leftist ideas never worked. DDR is the perfect example for that and that’s why the East German states vehemently reject the left. They have suffered and knows that it will not work again.
The way forward is a sensible progressive centrist government which makes the life of hard working people easier and people who abuse and try to live upon other peoples tax money a lives a living hell. The meaning of living is not paying taxes and working half of the year for the Finanzamt and for the freeloaders.
I live in Germany, and you are completely wrong. In my state the Greens have ruled for 15 years and the economic success was pretty good with the state having a higher GDP/capita than the rest of Germny and even the EU. They also managed to reduce the state's debt. Accomplished a myriad of other things, too.
I live in Germany, and you are completely wrong, friend. The Greens sure as hell didn't start deindustrializing anyone, and the idea that after almost 20 years of centrist governments, the thing that would save us would be the next centrist government is ludicrous.
It won’t but how else does general public signal that they do not want whatever mainstream parties are offering. Any proposals? Democracy isn’t working as intended. Autocracy is unacceptable. So what now?
FDP is unreliable. Twice they walked away from governance responsibility. Olaf Schulz Government fell down because of them. Moreover they don’t have any agenda worth voting.
Greens could be a choice because they had an effective leader in Haebeck and good governance story in a state. But they need to get practical and stop opposing nuclear.
Die Linke is coming up with all sorts of right messages for middle-class but they have a past.
Honestly there is no party which has correctly identified nation’s problems and proposed solutions to public. At best all offer a small increment.
AfD on the other hand, while offering nothing good, has a strong emotive appeal that works on older people, who are major voter base and are unhappy that the society around them is filling with unfamiliar faces or that their pension is lower than social benefits received by refugees. For other voters, voting for AfD is as I said earlier, is just a protest signal.
The problem is economic pie is shrinking because of incompetent leadership in all spheres. The decline is structural and no one has any decent ideas on how to fix it, forget selling the fix to public. The country is raising debt at higher interests that is not being deployed into areas that will generate future returns.
The proposal to restrict the access to information came from Amthor himself -- he was in the working group to prepare this proposal for the coalition agreement.
It is not a rumour, it is a plain public fact. Amthor's shady connection to Augustus Intelligence was revealed by a request using this law.
Yes, it's his job now doing this. But as long as he doesn't directly say it, we can only assume his personal motivation for taking this job and making this proposal, as also the motivation of those supporting him. So for legal reasons, it's "rumours".
Recently there was a days long blackout in the middle of winter in Berlin due to a left-extremist attack on power line infrastructure [1]. This was mainly because all those critical infrastructure information is publicly accessible. I can imagine the goal is to prevent such critical information being publicly available in the future.
Also, there was big scandal from then health minister of Germany [2] and the information came out through various media out lets. I can imagine the politicians wants to prevent that happening in the future as well, so the corruption would go undetected (this is just my opinion)
Retaliation for exposing major character flaws of the chancellor’s cabinet and potentially corruptness of major CDU (Christian Democratic Union) figures close to the chancellor seems a plausible answer.
FoIA requests humiliated half of the chancellor’s cabinet this year, including the chancellor himself.
The agricultural minister (CSU)(CDUs sister party) was especially proud of his nickname "the black butcher".
Someone sent a request inquiring about the hygiene protocols of his butchers shop via FoIA and he rather closed shop to deny access to the protocols than hand them out. This is now in front of a court and the media made fun of him for being the black butcher without a butchery.
Digital Minister (CDU) went on TV and proudly announced no more fax machines in his ministry.
Someone sent his undersecretary a fax the same day with the title "Jäger des verlorenen Faxes" which translates into "hunter of the lost fax" and is a Hommage to the German Indiana Jones raiders of the last ark movie title.
Two weeks later the minister sat in an interview and said he needed to correct himself. If he sees another fax machine in his ministry it’s going to get thrown out.
There was a huge conference that is run annually by a company the culture minister (CDU) is controlling that allowed access to major German political figures including private talks, including the minister of economy (CDU), for a fixed price.
It was only uncovered by a FoIA request. It was so bad the Bavarian prime minister had to pull any funding and recommendations to the conference and had to stay away from it after going there for years.
Just this week the mayor of Berlin (CDU) had to give up his spot as top candidate in the upcoming mayoral race because he lied to the press and even lied repeatedly about phoning with the chancellor during the major attack on the energy infrastructure in Berlin by allegedly left-wing extremists.
A FoIA request busted the lying mayor as well as the lying chancellor, whose ministry couldn’t provide any proof they telephoned at all at the time they both said they had phoned, when a court asked them to deliver proof to the court.
This is only on the federal level, in a single year.
IFG/FoIA busted tons of lying and cheating local politicians over the years. Of course, the party that is involved in most of the heavy cases does want this law to die or be completely ineffective.
It’s very annoying for the chancellor that normal people have the right to inform themselves by whom and how decisions were made as soon as public money is involved.
But he’s also calling every German citizen lazy and cheating with sick days, etc., so I’d say the German people have a huge reason to distrust this cabinet and use the IFG/FoIA as the small man’s nuclear bomb, and the cabinet really doesn’t like that the peasants can fight back with the most annoying weapon in their arsenal, counter-bureaucracy.
Thanks for the overview: the common and intuitive view when transparency is attacked in this way is that the ruling class wants to protect themselves, and your list provides ample evidence.
I hope the Parliament doesn't buy the story about protecting critical infrastructure.
The previous president was burning tens of million of Euros on renting private jets on the taxpayer's dime for trips that weren't related to his duties, and when reporters wanted to investigate this misuse, the government came forward and called the president's travel history (and expenses) a national security topic and remove it from the freedom of information.
Isn't it convenient how you can just cover corruption under the rug by invoking national security? I'm surprised it hasn't been used more often.
I dont think so, they want to repeat it, security-force should be implemented like in east-Germany, capitalism like in west-Germany and the wall is now in the Ukraine build with dead bodies instead of stone.
Shame on you! You turning it upside down, Germany think of them self as the worst war criminal ever (and forever) and that's is why the dont allow themself to ever criticize Israel whatever they do.
Also, Germany will not arrest Bibi, even if the ICC orders his arrest. That's how you know Germany is not behind the ICC and does not respect an international court unless it benefits them. This perfectly represents the German government's understanding of what a free, law-abiding, and open democracy should be, and it is directly reflected in the EU.
That historical guilt and awareness are noticeable in Germans and Germany. Their unconditional support of Israel is literally one of the consequences. So was their massive support for refugees.
They are really way stronger in admitting their country crimes the other countries I know about who generally like to pretend none of that ugly stuff was happening.
While I disagree with the doom of some posters (especially coming over from r/de) I do think this is a systematic issue we need to tackle.
These organisation fights for a direct democratic veto right so any change change can be fought against with enough signs. Please support (and people from other countries feel inspired)
As a German citizen let me tell you, the rate of decline this country is in is truly shocking. This is by far the worst government in my lifetime, and remarkably there is wide consensus about it across the population (above 85% dissatisfaction, if you think I am exaggerating here).
Industry and trade associations aren't happy either, which raises the question who asks for this? Life is getting forcefully precarious for a lot of people: Reduction of labor rights; stigmatization of unemployment, down to calls for forced labor; inflation; heavy increase in taxes; unaffordable housing... Mind you, none of that is economically necessary (e.g. we could prosecute tax evasion and tax the rich to begin with). All while transparency and democratic institutions are needlessly eroded.
And then there is the real threat of a next AfD (fascists oligarchy party) government looming above all. It's like CDU/SPD are preparing for a authoritarian take-over. Incidentally, there are documented connections between CDU leaders and foreign think tanks like The Heritage Foundation. Not to mention the constant endorsement and promotion of the AfD by Musk and Vance.
It's fucking wild and scary. I honestly fear, Germany is past the point of no return. I think we got moderately lucky Trump decided to outdo himself with Iran, and then the recent record heat wave, which felt downright apocalyptic. The theoretical negative consequences of some policies became immediately very tangible and undeniable. But I am not sure that's enough to shake up people. The opposition is somewhat complicit by not stepping up and presenting a vision towards democracy, equality and reason.
It's the continuation of a process that is going on for 25-30 years. As others have noted, Germany's industrial base is eroding due to high energy costs and Chinese competition. Its political decisions over the last two decades have been questionable, accelerating the decline and any true reform is unlikely to get a majority in the current gerontocratic society. There is no need to attribute this to malice, I think it can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Merkel era was "incompetence"/inaction, Merz is pure malice. Remember when he did the McDonalds ad during his campaign and then the first thing after being elected was the gastronomy tax reduction which heavily favored, you guessed it, McDonalds? Sorry, wasn't actually the first thing. The first thing was breaking his campaign promise of honoring Schuldenbremse, after using the Schuldenbremse to explode the former government. He then took future Germany's money to pay his fastfood bros. If that's not malice, what is? Well, I would actually call it treason. And let's not start with Reiche and Spahn talking malice.
I would also reject the notion China "happened" to Germany, or energy costs were rising due to moral panics regarding nuclear power.
Germany once was leader in renewable energy tech, both solar and wind. Corruption and lobby driven politics intentionally abandoned that edge and caused an inefficient energy market, which is a main factor in energy costs. Of course our exceptionally productive and capable Mittelstand is not considered "German industry", only a few old-money corporations are. Your are saying the decline happened over 30 years, but the last nuclear power plat was only shut down 2023. And Germany's naive dependence on Russian gas was one of the main causal factors for the Ukraine war and all the expenses it caused. There absolutely was a cheaper, sustainable path intentionally not taken.
The same is true for our industry. It's corruption/lobbyism, arrogance and inaction, in face of slowly emerging Chinese "competition", which caused the downfall. It's not like politics/industry tried their best and failed. They tried nothing. On the contrary, they enforced the status quo over innovation and now when their power play failed they got nothing to offer. The reason BMW isn't the leader in electric cars is because at some point management decided to scrape the successful program, because "muh ICE so technology!". VW never even tried, but rather went all-in on lobbying to future-proof their business. Let's raise taxes for the bail-out.
> This is by far the worst government in my lifetime
I guess we all can safely conclude that all governments of the word (world's government? shoot that tinfoilhat), at least those who have any meaningful means of destruction at hand, are the worst not only in our, but also our parents' lifetimes (assuming the mean age of HN commenters as 30-40).
I think especially in the US it presents as fascism, and the AfD clearly models itself to their image, but fundamentally I think it's globally rather an anti-democratic, social-darwinistic oligarchy. Nothing in current German politics could be described as "ultra-nationalistic" or pushing a personality cult, but rather as semi-opaque sell-out of the country. I think it presents as fascism, but it's more opportunistic and not as ideologically driven as it's been in the past.
Look, Thiel is gay, Weidel is gay, Spahn is gay and they all push anti-LGBT policies globally. They are cynic, self-absorbed, "got mine" psychopaths. They don't feel better because they are white or German, but because they got power, influence and wealth. I almost wish they were nationalists or had an honest concern for any share of the general population. Their politics wouldn't be as destructive. Instead they are building bunkers.
Some make the argument, capitalism needed democracy facing the soviet authoritarian system enemy of the past, but now this freedom and participation has become a weakness in current corporate geopolitics. China has shown, you can have "the best" of both worlds. I personally think, it's just the logical consequence of wealth centralization and inequality we allowed to happen.
The question is ultimately, what kind of culture makes a people, really. Do they deeply identify as free citizens or serfs? For example, the Russians never had a bottom up revolution or systemic change, I don't expect them to rise up no matter the suck. The US is difficult to judge, because of the racial divide and red scare brainwashing era preventing post-war revolutionary tradition found across Europe. They are still very influenced by dogma and repressed emotions. Things are pretty bad and they haven't done shit, so I am afraid they will bow to the suck.
Here in Germany, I don't know. People, grew up learning there is a time for just violence. Looking at past gigantic anti-AfD demonstrations, I am hopeful, if it has to be done, it will get done. I hope there is a large enough share of the population which will make any fundamental power change unsustainable. Right now, people are in shock and still cling to their old realities, but something is brewing already. The generational injustice helps. Then again, large parts of the population are evidently fucking idiots and senile got-mines.
Sorry this is more an effect of your social media consumption .
I don't deny the problem the country is facing but your doom is multiplied by social media.
Touch some grass, maybe pay for traditional media and you get a view of the trade offs the government is facing. It doesnt mean you have to agree with the choice but you know...
" Industry and trade associations aren't happy either, which raises the question who asks for this? " A comprise is good if everyone involved is unhappy.
" As a German citizen let me tell you, the rate of decline this country is in is truly shocking. " Just let you know. Most AfD members share your sentiment. Maybe you should qquestion this feeling.
How do you know about German news if you don't read in social media? Maybe judge your media consumption. Your thinking is very emotional and very close to Afd members.
When you are leading manufacturing power in region and loosing markets to China while allowing external powers to destroy your energy supplies(banning nuclear and blowing Nord Stream 2).
No political bullshit will help with objective reality, being it rightoids who promise "optimizing" social spendings(while leaching on corruption) or leftoids who want to tax the rich(which will just drive factories and businesses to Poland/China/etc).
The destruction of Northstream 2 had no effect at all on the energy supply to Germany. The remaining capacity to Russia was never used over 50%, if that.
Considering Russia intentionally drove up prices in the months leading up to the invasion and even rented storage capacity to keep it empty to better blackmail, there never was a sane argument for keeping the gas imports from Russia going.
Limiting supply is limiting bargaining power, you will always end up with better deal even having worse alternative option. As a buyer you want as much supply as possible.
It's not just foreign nationals that would be barred from issuing requests but non-profit organizations as well. Also, the cap on fees would be eliminated, further increasing the barriers for people wanting to issue requests.
Is there any material difference between a non-profit asking and people who work for the non-profit asking? Is the maker of the request made public or something?
It sounds like the organizations thing might just be to stop foreign nationals using that as a workaround.
The problem is not to restrict it to German citizens, but removing it for everything which is not a citizen, like civil rights organizations, environment organizations, and everyone else who has a legit interest to check on the governments work.
The plans also include that you have to have some relevant personal relation with the data. This will make it unlikely that an NGO can just request any random data under their staffs name. Additionally, requests should also mirror the real costs, which could go into the thousands or even ten of thousands. This makes it harder to find legit people which are willing to take the risks, even if the NGO could cover the costs.
Of course it's also all just speculation without any real laws written yet, but the direction is there.
The US and UK let anyone in the world file a request, regardless of citizenship.
Countries that don’t usually rationalize: government is answerable primary to those it governs and taxes, limit flood of requests, some laws only extend rights to citizens of countries that offer similar rights back, worry that other governments could use it as low cost intelligence gathering, harder to charge or pursue fees.
Don't they have courts for those things? If they are receiving a flood of unreasonable requests I'm sure they could ask a judge if they really have to do them.
This is a minor point. It gives the government broad power to reject any request, associations and media outlets are excluded, it costs more and the mandatory REDACTION OF NAMES is undercutting accountability completely.
Yea, I don't give a shit wether only citizen should be able to request data.
It excludes organisations and increases fees. So, if say Amnesty or Greenpeace (two NGOs opposing this act) want to FoI something, they have to get a German citizen to do it for them, possibly at considerable expense - and you bet if they try to compensate them, it'll be "foreign interference" and an excuse for suppression.
Like GDPR, the existence of FoI laws give government agencies a reason to develop systems to quickly and effortlessly give people the access they're entitled to. Given the existence of such systems (analogous to the "data takeout" systems businesses must have for PII), giving access to foreigners as well should be unproblematic. It's supposed to be public information in the first place, roadblocks have no place.
It doesn't feel nice to say but hearing from people I know who work in politics just how much the prospect of having to disclose something changes behaviour (in what people say but also where they say it) I'd be in favour of some moves like this in Britain.
There is obviously a very good reason for transparency but I think the full extent of FOI is basically like asking if someone is wearing trousers on a call
Worth noting that this is a push from the CDU who are leading the government, but their coalition partner the SPD has already come out pretty strongly against this, so it's rather unclear if this would ever actually go through (not to mention challenges from constitutional courts). The CDU cannot unilaterally push through legislation without the SPD.
The SPD has rolled over for the CDU in the past on things, but they've also blocked things they thought were important enough to block, so it's really anyone's guess if this go through (I personally wouldn't bet on it, but I'm sure a bunch of dour pessimists will come explain to me that it's a foregone conclusion and I'm naive).
"SPD will block this" is contradicted by SPD already voting for the identical Berlin version weeks ago.
Not identical but similar and state vs federal level, might as well be different parties. Thats not to say I am not Just as worried as you
SPD has no integrity either way
Let's just remember that spd unironically thought the CumEx expert Scholz should be given the highest position in the government.
After that debacle I honestly cannot understand how anyone with even an iota of integrity can vote for them again and think any of them would ever act in the interests of their people
"After that debacle I honestly cannot understand how anyone with even an iota of integrity can vote for them again"
Well, there is actually a very old song about them, here in a new version (that is also already quite old by now)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vFL0QWxugI
But the answer is probably lack of real alternatives.
The slogan "Wer hat uns verraten? – Sozialdemokraten!" has a rather long history. Coined by communist during the 1918 November Revolution, it referenced the social democrats at least tentative support of the suppression of the communist revolution and the murder of Karl Liebknecht und Rosa Luxemburg.
During Weimar times it was popular with both right-wing and left-wing forces. The Nazis - who sent social democrats to the concentration camps - also used it in their propaganda.
As much as I disagree with many of the things today's social democrats say and do, it's worth remembering that this slogan was popularized and predominantly used by anti-democratic forces. It's not a particularly fair thing to throw around carelessly.
Their coalition partner is only publicly against it if there is little chance this criticism has any practical political effect. The SPD as a party is very much in favour of more or less all surveillance laws for citizens, and the contrary for public officials.
Sometimes they pretend otherwise, but only if the above rule applies. Not a dependent partner if you want to preserve freedoms for transparency and against surveillance.
First phrase in the article: "Shortly before the German parliament's summer recess, lawmakers approved a whole series of reforms." Sounds like "done and dusted" to me. The Bundesrat (the second chamber of the parliament) also approved, er... something, but it's not clear to me if it's just the health measures or also the rest. What's left is for the Bundespräsident to sign it, but that's a formality.
And yes, no idea why the SPD is so on board with this - some measures, like having to provide a medical certificate from the first day of an illness (which in practice means you have to go see a doctor personally on the first day of sickness), are definitely not going to increase the dismal approval ratings of this government. So, for example, if you're prone to migraines, until now you would have simply called in sick for a day, now you have to drag yourself to the doctor, only for them to tell you (after potentially hours of waiting) "oh, you do look very pale and sickly today, you probably do have a migraine, here's the certificate. I assume you already took one or several headache pills? Now please, go home and rest."?!
This hasn't been voted on in the Bundesttag yet, let alone the Bundesrat or Bundespräsident.
Ok, so what did they actually approve? Is this just a "declaration of intent", and the actual laws will follow later?! The article clearly says "lawmakers approved a whole series of reforms" - I was also surprised that this worked so quickly, but what do I know...
I think the article just has poor wording. They went through a raft of different, unrelated reforms already, and this is part of the next set the CDUs want to get through.
DW is the only media outlet in Germany financed directly via taxes. They are unlikely to be impartial
In what way do you think they are partial here?
Oh, wow, I have to admit that I didn't know that until today (although I have been living in Germany for 26 years now). I kinda just assumed that they are part of the public broadcasting system financed by the "Rundfunkbeitrag"...
Declaration of intent is a good description. Nothing is decided yet. I don't think the laws are written yet and there was definitely no vote yet.
It means that this is a cabinet decision, not (yet) legislation. It still has to go through the Bundestag. Given the opposition within the SPD and the idea being very unpopular among voters, it is not yet clear whether this will actually become law.
It is still very worrying and the unfortunate result of a lot of things going wrong at the cabinet level.
It hasn't even been formally approved by the cabinet. Right now it's just a political agreement between the coalition party. A law still has to be drafted that the cabinet can then submit to the Bundestag.
This seems to be the latest attempt of the conservative CDU to further reduce transparency and accountability of government officials. One could posit the goal is to enable corruption without all that hassle of the media potentially finding out about it.
A country in decay..
I'd generally agree, but my follow up question would be: which western country isn't?
Poland is now in the Western sphere of influence and it is not in decay. A weak case can be made for Ireland but it’s harder to extract effects of tax haven status. But Poland certainly. Going to be a higher income populace than the UK soon at this rate.
The US is unusual as a federation. Some parts decline, others rise. I think it’s resilient. And every time something goes wrong, America pulls out a magic new technology. We will see if R&D will carry the day again.
> Poland is now in the Western sphere of influence and it is not in decay.
Polands fertility rate in 2025 was 1.1. It is some sort of dystopia allready for people.
The US is more in decay than Germany. Currently it becomes more and more a broken democracy. Cope is strong here.
Denmark?
The Swiss?
Norway?
And I was in Serbia lately, and while it was not as developed as NW-EU, nobody there described it as decaying (and many said they experiences decay when living in western nations over the past 2 decades).
Denmark is the architect of Chat Control. Even the extreme version that requires all E2E communications be accessible to the government.
Denmark is not just decayed, it is completely rotten.
Controversial proposals like Chat control are often pushed by hard lobby through the current eu presidency state because of their possition. It is likely that if Denmark wasn't heading eu at the time they would have little to do with Chat control. Also likely they were one of the more resilient countries to propose this.
I wasn't expecting to find Hamlet in these comments...
> Denmark is not just decayed, it is completely rotten
I don't know about the truthness of this claim, but you are definitely getting the upvote for the humour.
Some people still don't have a clue that it is the almost the entirety of EU member countries in Europe that are rotten and are not doing particularly well.
The only country in Europe that is the exception is Norway which is not part of the EU.
> And I was in Serbia lately [..]
With OP postulating that it is to enable corruption, and a sub-reply affirming that it is therefore the trait of a country in decay, bringing in Serbia as a counter-example is hilarious.
Serbia ranks 116th in the corruption perception index, Germany 10th. (Lower is better)
Corruption perception lags actual corruption. Countries that are becoming more corrupt are perceived as less corrupt. Countries that are becoming less corrupt are perceived as more corrupt.
yeah, but decaying means something gets worse. Maybe corruption is getting less in Serbia despite still being bad?
>And I was in Serbia lately, and while it was not as developed as NW-EU, nobody there described it as decaying (and many said they experiences decay when living in western nations over the past 2 decades)
Yeah, a lot of the western countries that aren't wealthy enough to afford the luxury of indulging in absurd farcical politics and policies over the past 40yr are doing pretty decent.
Why limit yourself to western countries? In fact, why limit it to countries at all? Isn't it the most popular trope of all time to decry the state of today and romanticise yesterday? People have "not been wanting to work anymore" for at least 150 years, things were always better in the olden days, people don't make 'em like they used to, etm.
There's very little value in a statement like yours. It's a truism that has never been correct.
> things were always better in the olden days, people don't make 'em like they used to.
Just because successive generations make the same observations about <X> doesn't mean that <X> hasn't actually been steadily declining, you know.
https://xkcd.com/1227/
So are you just repeating the parent's flawed argument? Maybe you should see what that comic looks like extrapolated out to 2026: "yo on god writing be dead, frfr no cap <100 emoji> <fire emoji>"
How far back do we take it? In pre-historic times, did people crawl accross the ground to better enjoy it?
There's little correlation between people complaining about something being better in the good old days, and it actualli being better. Not for no reason is "rose-tinted glasses" an expression.
That it sucks elsewhere means we can't decry this instance?
Poland, but its on borrowed time due to the extreme fertility crisis.
Is fertility so important?
Maybe the other western countries are equally infertile, but just allowed many immigrants in (which counts are population expansion) that also have more children on average.
How are Japan and Korea holing out? They are further down the infertility down-spiral.
>How are Japan and Korea holing out?
https://japandaily.jp/why-japanese-elders-choose-prison-over...
https://www.straitstimes.com/asia/east-asia/1-in-3-south-kor...
Yeah, it's pretty important if you are interested in the continued existence of your society
Most popular boys name, per place:
- Warsaw: Nikodem
- Oslo: Mohammad
- Berlin and Brandenburg: Mohammed
- England as a whole: Muhammad
Mind you that the names top these lists in spite of usually being present in there in multiple spelling versions. E.g. if all different spelling versions of Muhammad were combined it would top the Dutch statistics as well.
That's because Muslims have their naming concentrated on a single name so much that anywhere you have a sizable number of Muslims, the most popular name in that place is Mohammed, even though most people aren't named Mohammed.
We should be asking why Muslims avoid Warsaw. That's odd.
Lol, what on earth makes you single out Poland as the single western country not in decay right now?
Its economy has been growing for 30 years non-stop, to the point that it is now compared to Singapore.
In context of the article, the economic performance is hardly relevant. The authoritarian forces are still strong in Poland, their institutional damage persistent.
Im really happy for Poland for its growing economy. (though it has the same challenges as Germany roughly speaking)
But You can't just deny the political problems. Propably some Americans do it - to cope with Trump who is worser than any PiS president. Poland has the EU as democratic layer but US with Trump doesnt have it.
Yeah, I am rooting for Poland, but it's simply not a shining example of democratic integrity.
> Poland has the EU as democratic layer but US with Trump doesnt have it.
I mean, let's see. The US thought checks and balances would hold, but they didn't, and the EU didn't prevent Hungary and Poland to slip into authoritarian dynamics to begin with. It's not exactly the legal body drawing the latter two back to change, but economic benefits. And Germany also suffers the same untested myth of "checks and balances", which really assumes some political decency. And no legal construct considered bazillionaire tech bros playing god with our dopamine receptors.
We all shouldn't take democracy for granted. I hope we all start to see the real enemy of the people and find agreement on what's actually important right now. Luckily, causal relations are becoming evident for everyone to see in this critical time. Now people need to start seeing.
I really hope Europe's citizens find unity, a shared identity and a renewed lust for democracy. Quite frankly, here in this libertarian club the EU regulations are not particularly popular, but for me the EU laws are mostly positive and I am a huge fan of the whole thing.
Of what use is democratic integrity if the body politic is disintegrating in most so-called democracies?
Plenty and mo. Who are we, if not Partanguagoos?
Economic growth is not the kind that's being referred to. I think Germany is also economically growing? It doesn't matter, they are still decaying in most ways.
> I think Germany is also economically growing?
Barely, and it was in a recession 2023-2024.
It isn't.
It doesn’t have immigrants so the right wing tries extra hard to paint it as rosy.
There are about 1.5 million immigrants from Ukraine alone.
The Americans who fetishize Poland do it because of their concept of it being 'racially pure' while having a growing economy. They don't particularly care about Ukrainians because Americans don't recognize any racial or ethnic difference between Ukrainians and Poles.
Look up a map of the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth
So you are confirming that I'm right in my assertion that the reason you aren't bothered by the Ukrainian refugees in Poland is that you don't see them diluting the racial purity of Poland?
White immigrants. Don’t act naive.
Ding Ding Ding
Where is the lie?
It’s not that rosy? Especially compared to literally every country in Western Europe.
That impacts the whole developed world, it’s not a polish issue
The very consumerism that has made it materially wealthy has fucked up its citizens' priorities. Indeed, because the wealth differential over the last 30 years is as steep as it is - and because people are generally petty - it actually creates a perverse incentive to prioritize wealth accumulation over family life just to "keep up". You don't want the Joneses to outdo you. You don't want to seem shabbier.
So, maybe rapid growth combined with consumerist impulses is a deadly combination for a society. If only rapid growth were combined with healthy and wise priorities...
Who said there was one?
yep, it's the populists communication strategies winning over the voters so people in power can screw the populace as they like and the spin doctors (not the band) will make people think it's in their interest.
AfD will come and rescue everyone. /s
For decades, we have become accustomed to similar anti-constitutional moves from the CDU/CSU. Remarkably, while the German government fails to implement such policies, former CDU chancellor candidate Ursula von der Leyen is pushing them through at the EU level. For some reason, she is now at the helm of the EU. According to German law, anti-constitutional actions are normally considered terrorism.
I can explain this: when a citizen opposes a politician, the citizen is a terrorist. It doesn't matter what the actual disagreement is.
As a freedom of information officer for a public body in another EU country, I feel that some of these changes such as the restriction of requests to EU citizens are inevitable in my country too.
The volume of FOI requests we get is huge and they are more time intensive than ever, due to the fact most are now written by llms.
I see no reason why the taxpayers of any EU country should be footing the bill for requests from non EU citizens. These requests take a significant amount of public sector resources to compile records and deliver decisions. Given this, why should a non-EU citizen's request be held in equal esteem to EU citizens'?
It comes down to the intent behind these laws. Is it to provide transparency to the citizens that government are accountable to or is it to provide records/information to anyone from anywhere in the world.
How about keeping the information public from start so a request is not even needed?
Fully in favour of this and we are making efforts to publish as much of our data publicly as we can. We have set up an open data portal for this purpose.
My country differs from Germany in that our Freedom of Information laws are much broader and allow anyone to request virtually any record held by a public organisation, with the grounds for refusal being narrower. For example, generic day to day email exchanges between low level public officials are requestable and we have to argue why it is against the public interest to prevent releasing them.
While we're trying to publish as much data that is of public interest ad possible, it's proving very difficult to anticipate many of these requests.
In my organisation in particular - we're receiving requests from consultation firms outside the EU on costings for certain services. So we(The taxpayer) are essentially doing their research for them.
Requests from outside of eu, the requester should pay the full cost of compilation and then some.
Why not make those emails public to begin with?
There's no need to compile/publish if all data is public to begin with.
Unfortunately, not all data held by an organisation is generated and held in a publishable format.
The data in this example is created incidentally within email chains as part of a broader process.
It's really not cost effective to publish real-time data that's been requested by these firms.
So in principle, I agree that where there is substantial data held that the public are interested in, it should be published. However, it's not feasible or cost effective to publish all data or records held by a public organisation.
Could those email chains be turned into a mailing list available by default, like lkml.org ? Then nothing would need to be done to make it "cost effective to publish".
What service should be cut or tax increased in order to pay for it?
Data is there. Bundle it up in torrent and let community handle it. Cheaper than current system.
I think implying it's that simple is naive
In reality every public department would need more data staff to collate, prepare and publish data and maintain ownership of it, as a bare minimum. They'd be responsible for accuracy and any mistakes.
Not disagreeing with the idea but it does need funding. So I repeat my question
Wait? They previously allowed everybody and their mother to request the information? Limiting it to ‘citizens of the european union’ seems eminently reasonable.
There is more to it. To request information you have to have some "legitimate interest" which is not yet defined and sounds like an easy way to not give out information.
Also no more NGOs. They were the ones who had the most power to wrestle information out of the hands of rather unwilling parties. The cost of going to court for this would deter most private persons.
Also no more limit on the cost they can bill you for providing the information. This can easily be 5 figures and isn't known before it's too late.
Citizen: Pays taxes, creating the info being requested
Citizen: Pays again to get access to the info
Maybe, but the more problematic part is disallowing NGOs from submitting information requests. Multiple previous corruption scandals in Germany were exposed exactly because NGOs themselves were allowed to submit these information requests (and pay for them).
IMHO banning organisations from making requests will have no effect. People will just make requests in their own names, instead, then what?
Also with the planned changes, you have to prove that you have an legitimate interest in the information. Which makes the whole thing very vague. So the government can just say that they don't think you have a legitimate interest in the information and deny your request. You would then have to sue.
Also also want to invoice you for all costs that your request causes. Previously it was capped at 500€. So your request could cost you thousands of euros. You are at the mercy of the government how many people are working on your request and how efficient they process it.
> Previously it was capped at 500€. So your request could cost you thousands of euros.
To be clear, it is currently costing the taxpayer said thousands of Euros. Time spent by government workers on FoI requests is meaningful and not free. That does not make them a bad idea, but we should be clear that passing costs on to the requester isn't precisely nefarious?
The transparency of this information is a public good in itself, so it is in the interest of the public that this information can be requested as freely as possible.
Of course there should probably be a way to limit waste, but putting all financial cost onto a single person is a way to effectively limit freedom of information to the point where it contradicts and undermines the whole idea behind it. That's one of the reasons why this change is being proposed, and it is not a stretch to call this nefarious.
Yes, it is costing the taxpayer. However, I think there needs to be some cap, because otherwise the government can weaponize that and be extra inefficient when processing requests for things they don't want to become publicly available.
The current cap of 500€ is a good compromise IMHO: It deters people from issuing unnecessary FoI requests while at the same time keeping it in reach for the average person if they really want that information.
Perhaps the cap should be multiplied by the number of people in an organization or business making the request?
If you design processes to be open by design, the cost of extracting data (removing sensitive data that is indeed not needed) goes down radically. Governments know this and resist it.
There are fees that need to be paid to make a freedom of information request (fees which they also want to jack up), and if an NGO offers to pay that fee so that a native German citizen can make the request, it could be construed as foreign interference.
If the fees are raised, individuals will be less willing to pay out of their own pocket. Even if they aren't raised people are less willing to pay out of pocket compared to an NGO or journalism org that had revenue and budget allotments specifically for that purpose. Assuming NGOs will also not be allowed to directly pay for request fees made by their members/collaborators.
The government has a list of pesky troublemakers to target individually if they prove too annoying? I'm sure the good people of Germany can figure out something to charge someone with.
Such a restriction isn’t patently unreasonable but it would make it more difficult for foreign journalists to do research, and it would add the hassle of requiring individuals to show proof of residence when submitting a request. Anonymous requests under pseudonyms would become impossible.
For what it’s worth, only a handful of US states have a residency requirement for FOIA requests.
Not really.
The main "purpose" for such information is to be published, and at that point it makes no difference who exactly requested it.
Personal view:
The current mainly governing party in Germany (CDU/CSU) is a bunch of incompetent, nepotistic gerontocrats, and this change is mainly intended to make it harder for independent press to air their dirty laundry.
Just for reference: Approval rating for Merz (chancellor) is under 20% (!!); even Trump is >35%.
I am wondering if a valid aspect of limiting this to people living in Germany could be to prevent Denial of Service attacks from abroad. Of course these could also be launched from Germans...
Under the current law you already have to pay up to 500€ for a request. That would be a very costly DoS attack.
What about watchdog groups?
They will not be allowed to file requests.
Won't this require citizen to provide ID and therefore citizens asking difficult questions could become a target for retaliation?
Yes, and there is currently talks if this also means NGOs like FragDenStaat or media outlets could no longer request information.
You can also be a resident, paying plenty of taxes, yet not be a citizen.
was already the case https://www.bverwg.de/pm/2024/10
It's already the case that if you question Israel's right to exist you are considered an antisemitic terrorist and arrested - they are now trying to codify this into an actual law (not just something the police do).
There is no freedom in Germany. The mistakes of the past did not change anyone's mindset about human rights and freedom. They only learned how to put on a facade of caring about them. And they are the most powerful member of the European Union.
> The mistakes of the past did not change anyone's mindset about human rights and freedom
As if anybody who experienced this themselves has a big influence on current politics...WW2 ended 81 years ago
Mindsets are quite hereditary at the collective level, if you didn't notice.
I noticed, but then those next generations wouldn't change their mindsets, cause they had that mindset from childhood on.
I don't think this would pass at all, the German parliament is now in summer break and once they're back there would be 3 federal state elections and depending on its outcome, the current government could collapse before the end of this year.
Lol, do you seriously think the 'alternative' would be any more progressive when it comes to freedom of information (or government transparency in general) once they'd be in power?
I guess the Left or the Greens or the useless SPD could theoretically win the elections.
It won't happen though. It'll be AfD.
There was already a left party in power. It’s called DDR (East Germany). We all know how it ended. Any government with an extremist party is not a good government, regardless it being left or right.
But then again in a democracy the politicians must listen to peoples vote instead of preaching them and if that has happened in Germany, they they would already be having a center right government instead of the current circus
theres a world of difference between a left party, even radical left like die linke, and ddr style communist dictatorship. and i dont like the greens views on nuclear power but they might be the only one who can save germany from afd fascism and cdu family-values flavored petty authoritarianism.
if your definition of center right is fdp then get ready for even more corruption and corporate capture of everything that matters. privatized railways and utilities, anti union laws, unregulated pollution, stagnant wages and the rich getting richer. theres a reason its called the businessmans party.
from an outside pov it looks like there is no center right or center left party that cares about both civil rights and working/middle class economic interests. the only "reasonable" option is the radical left. if someone lives in germany and thinks im wrong please correct me.
I live in Germany and you are wrong. The last green government did a fantastic job with starting the desindustrialization of German economy. If it was up to them we would be living in medieval age. If anyone still votes for the greens, then need to go and get a mental check up.
Radical left is not the reasonable option. Time and time it was provides that radical leftist ideas never worked. DDR is the perfect example for that and that’s why the East German states vehemently reject the left. They have suffered and knows that it will not work again.
The way forward is a sensible progressive centrist government which makes the life of hard working people easier and people who abuse and try to live upon other peoples tax money a lives a living hell. The meaning of living is not paying taxes and working half of the year for the Finanzamt and for the freeloaders.
I live in Germany, and you are completely wrong. In my state the Greens have ruled for 15 years and the economic success was pretty good with the state having a higher GDP/capita than the rest of Germny and even the EU. They also managed to reduce the state's debt. Accomplished a myriad of other things, too.
I live in Germany, and you are completely wrong, friend. The Greens sure as hell didn't start deindustrializing anyone, and the idea that after almost 20 years of centrist governments, the thing that would save us would be the next centrist government is ludicrous.
I don’t think so. But if that’s what the people want who are you or me to question that? It’s the people’s will and democracy in action
Democracy doesn't always lead to what people actually want, in an era of widespread brainwashing.
It won’t but how else does general public signal that they do not want whatever mainstream parties are offering. Any proposals? Democracy isn’t working as intended. Autocracy is unacceptable. So what now?
They could vote for any other non-mainstream party? Even FDP (libertarians) would be a better choice than AfD.
FDP is unreliable. Twice they walked away from governance responsibility. Olaf Schulz Government fell down because of them. Moreover they don’t have any agenda worth voting.
Greens could be a choice because they had an effective leader in Haebeck and good governance story in a state. But they need to get practical and stop opposing nuclear.
Die Linke is coming up with all sorts of right messages for middle-class but they have a past.
Honestly there is no party which has correctly identified nation’s problems and proposed solutions to public. At best all offer a small increment.
AfD on the other hand, while offering nothing good, has a strong emotive appeal that works on older people, who are major voter base and are unhappy that the society around them is filling with unfamiliar faces or that their pension is lower than social benefits received by refugees. For other voters, voting for AfD is as I said earlier, is just a protest signal.
The problem is economic pie is shrinking because of incompetent leadership in all spheres. The decline is structural and no one has any decent ideas on how to fix it, forget selling the fix to public. The country is raising debt at higher interests that is not being deployed into areas that will generate future returns.
What incidents are driving such a change?
Rumour goes that too many high ranking fraudulent CDU-politicians were exposed with this (Philipp Amthor and Jens Spahn for example).
The proposal to restrict the access to information came from Amthor himself -- he was in the working group to prepare this proposal for the coalition agreement.
It is not a rumour, it is a plain public fact. Amthor's shady connection to Augustus Intelligence was revealed by a request using this law.
https://fragdenstaat.de/artikel/exklusiv/2025/03/union-will-... (In German)
Yes, it's his job now doing this. But as long as he doesn't directly say it, we can only assume his personal motivation for taking this job and making this proposal, as also the motivation of those supporting him. So for legal reasons, it's "rumours".
Fair enough. And you are definitely better than them! :-) You are too kind to these people.
Recently there was a days long blackout in the middle of winter in Berlin due to a left-extremist attack on power line infrastructure [1]. This was mainly because all those critical infrastructure information is publicly accessible. I can imagine the goal is to prevent such critical information being publicly available in the future.
Also, there was big scandal from then health minister of Germany [2] and the information came out through various media out lets. I can imagine the politicians wants to prevent that happening in the future as well, so the corruption would go undetected (this is just my opinion)
[1]- https://www.dw.com/en/berlin-blackout-how-dangerous-are-left... [2] - https://www.dw.com/en/covid-19-german-govt-suffers-defeat-in...
Retaliation for exposing major character flaws of the chancellor’s cabinet and potentially corruptness of major CDU (Christian Democratic Union) figures close to the chancellor seems a plausible answer.
FoIA requests humiliated half of the chancellor’s cabinet this year, including the chancellor himself.
The agricultural minister (CSU)(CDUs sister party) was especially proud of his nickname "the black butcher".
Someone sent a request inquiring about the hygiene protocols of his butchers shop via FoIA and he rather closed shop to deny access to the protocols than hand them out. This is now in front of a court and the media made fun of him for being the black butcher without a butchery.
Digital Minister (CDU) went on TV and proudly announced no more fax machines in his ministry.
Someone sent his undersecretary a fax the same day with the title "Jäger des verlorenen Faxes" which translates into "hunter of the lost fax" and is a Hommage to the German Indiana Jones raiders of the last ark movie title.
Two weeks later the minister sat in an interview and said he needed to correct himself. If he sees another fax machine in his ministry it’s going to get thrown out.
There was a huge conference that is run annually by a company the culture minister (CDU) is controlling that allowed access to major German political figures including private talks, including the minister of economy (CDU), for a fixed price.
It was only uncovered by a FoIA request. It was so bad the Bavarian prime minister had to pull any funding and recommendations to the conference and had to stay away from it after going there for years.
Just this week the mayor of Berlin (CDU) had to give up his spot as top candidate in the upcoming mayoral race because he lied to the press and even lied repeatedly about phoning with the chancellor during the major attack on the energy infrastructure in Berlin by allegedly left-wing extremists.
A FoIA request busted the lying mayor as well as the lying chancellor, whose ministry couldn’t provide any proof they telephoned at all at the time they both said they had phoned, when a court asked them to deliver proof to the court.
This is only on the federal level, in a single year.
IFG/FoIA busted tons of lying and cheating local politicians over the years. Of course, the party that is involved in most of the heavy cases does want this law to die or be completely ineffective.
It’s very annoying for the chancellor that normal people have the right to inform themselves by whom and how decisions were made as soon as public money is involved.
But he’s also calling every German citizen lazy and cheating with sick days, etc., so I’d say the German people have a huge reason to distrust this cabinet and use the IFG/FoIA as the small man’s nuclear bomb, and the cabinet really doesn’t like that the peasants can fight back with the most annoying weapon in their arsenal, counter-bureaucracy.
Thanks for the overview: the common and intuitive view when transparency is attacked in this way is that the ruling class wants to protect themselves, and your list provides ample evidence.
I hope the Parliament doesn't buy the story about protecting critical infrastructure.
Same thing happened in Romania.
The previous president was burning tens of million of Euros on renting private jets on the taxpayer's dime for trips that weren't related to his duties, and when reporters wanted to investigate this misuse, the government came forward and called the president's travel history (and expenses) a national security topic and remove it from the freedom of information.
Isn't it convenient how you can just cover corruption under the rug by invoking national security? I'm surprised it hasn't been used more often.
in ontario the same.
https://globalnews.ca/news/11943570/doug-ford-cellphone-free...
Germany is forgetting history already.
I dont think so, they want to repeat it, security-force should be implemented like in east-Germany, capitalism like in west-Germany and the wall is now in the Ukraine build with dead bodies instead of stone.
Germany has learned from history and become Israel's biggest supporter.
Shame on you! You turning it upside down, Germany think of them self as the worst war criminal ever (and forever) and that's is why the dont allow themself to ever criticize Israel whatever they do.
and supply weapons for committing genocide
True:
>Despite well-documented violations of international law violations in Gaza, Germany continues to authorize arms exports to Israel.
https://www.ecchr.eu/en/case/no-german-weapons-to-israel/
Also, Germany will not arrest Bibi, even if the ICC orders his arrest. That's how you know Germany is not behind the ICC and does not respect an international court unless it benefits them. This perfectly represents the German government's understanding of what a free, law-abiding, and open democracy should be, and it is directly reflected in the EU.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ICC_arrest_warrants_for_Israel...
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/election-winner-merz-in...
That historical guilt and awareness are noticeable in Germans and Germany. Their unconditional support of Israel is literally one of the consequences. So was their massive support for refugees.
They are really way stronger in admitting their country crimes the other countries I know about who generally like to pretend none of that ugly stuff was happening.
Giving the government wide leeway means more restrictions for you and less accountability for them? surprised_pikachu.jpg
While I disagree with the doom of some posters (especially coming over from r/de) I do think this is a systematic issue we need to tackle.
These organisation fights for a direct democratic veto right so any change change can be fought against with enough signs. Please support (and people from other countries feel inspired)
https://www.vetorecht.de/
As a German citizen let me tell you, the rate of decline this country is in is truly shocking. This is by far the worst government in my lifetime, and remarkably there is wide consensus about it across the population (above 85% dissatisfaction, if you think I am exaggerating here).
Industry and trade associations aren't happy either, which raises the question who asks for this? Life is getting forcefully precarious for a lot of people: Reduction of labor rights; stigmatization of unemployment, down to calls for forced labor; inflation; heavy increase in taxes; unaffordable housing... Mind you, none of that is economically necessary (e.g. we could prosecute tax evasion and tax the rich to begin with). All while transparency and democratic institutions are needlessly eroded.
And then there is the real threat of a next AfD (fascists oligarchy party) government looming above all. It's like CDU/SPD are preparing for a authoritarian take-over. Incidentally, there are documented connections between CDU leaders and foreign think tanks like The Heritage Foundation. Not to mention the constant endorsement and promotion of the AfD by Musk and Vance.
It's fucking wild and scary. I honestly fear, Germany is past the point of no return. I think we got moderately lucky Trump decided to outdo himself with Iran, and then the recent record heat wave, which felt downright apocalyptic. The theoretical negative consequences of some policies became immediately very tangible and undeniable. But I am not sure that's enough to shake up people. The opposition is somewhat complicit by not stepping up and presenting a vision towards democracy, equality and reason.
It's the continuation of a process that is going on for 25-30 years. As others have noted, Germany's industrial base is eroding due to high energy costs and Chinese competition. Its political decisions over the last two decades have been questionable, accelerating the decline and any true reform is unlikely to get a majority in the current gerontocratic society. There is no need to attribute this to malice, I think it can adequately be explained by incompetence.
Merkel era was "incompetence"/inaction, Merz is pure malice. Remember when he did the McDonalds ad during his campaign and then the first thing after being elected was the gastronomy tax reduction which heavily favored, you guessed it, McDonalds? Sorry, wasn't actually the first thing. The first thing was breaking his campaign promise of honoring Schuldenbremse, after using the Schuldenbremse to explode the former government. He then took future Germany's money to pay his fastfood bros. If that's not malice, what is? Well, I would actually call it treason. And let's not start with Reiche and Spahn talking malice.
I would also reject the notion China "happened" to Germany, or energy costs were rising due to moral panics regarding nuclear power.
Germany once was leader in renewable energy tech, both solar and wind. Corruption and lobby driven politics intentionally abandoned that edge and caused an inefficient energy market, which is a main factor in energy costs. Of course our exceptionally productive and capable Mittelstand is not considered "German industry", only a few old-money corporations are. Your are saying the decline happened over 30 years, but the last nuclear power plat was only shut down 2023. And Germany's naive dependence on Russian gas was one of the main causal factors for the Ukraine war and all the expenses it caused. There absolutely was a cheaper, sustainable path intentionally not taken.
The same is true for our industry. It's corruption/lobbyism, arrogance and inaction, in face of slowly emerging Chinese "competition", which caused the downfall. It's not like politics/industry tried their best and failed. They tried nothing. On the contrary, they enforced the status quo over innovation and now when their power play failed they got nothing to offer. The reason BMW isn't the leader in electric cars is because at some point management decided to scrape the successful program, because "muh ICE so technology!". VW never even tried, but rather went all-in on lobbying to future-proof their business. Let's raise taxes for the bail-out.
And then of course the establishment owned media helped too, preventing necessary adaptations: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221462962...
Corruption, arrogance and inaction caused the German downfall.
> This is by far the worst government in my lifetime
I guess we all can safely conclude that all governments of the word (world's government? shoot that tinfoilhat), at least those who have any meaningful means of destruction at hand, are the worst not only in our, but also our parents' lifetimes (assuming the mean age of HN commenters as 30-40).
TL;DR: The fascism is back.
Germany is not fascist. It strongly supports Israel.
Some would argue that's the same thing these days.
I think especially in the US it presents as fascism, and the AfD clearly models itself to their image, but fundamentally I think it's globally rather an anti-democratic, social-darwinistic oligarchy. Nothing in current German politics could be described as "ultra-nationalistic" or pushing a personality cult, but rather as semi-opaque sell-out of the country. I think it presents as fascism, but it's more opportunistic and not as ideologically driven as it's been in the past.
Look, Thiel is gay, Weidel is gay, Spahn is gay and they all push anti-LGBT policies globally. They are cynic, self-absorbed, "got mine" psychopaths. They don't feel better because they are white or German, but because they got power, influence and wealth. I almost wish they were nationalists or had an honest concern for any share of the general population. Their politics wouldn't be as destructive. Instead they are building bunkers.
Some make the argument, capitalism needed democracy facing the soviet authoritarian system enemy of the past, but now this freedom and participation has become a weakness in current corporate geopolitics. China has shown, you can have "the best" of both worlds. I personally think, it's just the logical consequence of wealth centralization and inequality we allowed to happen.
The question is ultimately, what kind of culture makes a people, really. Do they deeply identify as free citizens or serfs? For example, the Russians never had a bottom up revolution or systemic change, I don't expect them to rise up no matter the suck. The US is difficult to judge, because of the racial divide and red scare brainwashing era preventing post-war revolutionary tradition found across Europe. They are still very influenced by dogma and repressed emotions. Things are pretty bad and they haven't done shit, so I am afraid they will bow to the suck.
Here in Germany, I don't know. People, grew up learning there is a time for just violence. Looking at past gigantic anti-AfD demonstrations, I am hopeful, if it has to be done, it will get done. I hope there is a large enough share of the population which will make any fundamental power change unsustainable. Right now, people are in shock and still cling to their old realities, but something is brewing already. The generational injustice helps. Then again, large parts of the population are evidently fucking idiots and senile got-mines.
> which raises the question who asks for this?
Probably the 5000 ultra-rich who own 27% of Germanys wealth. CDU/CSU and even AfD is great news for them.
https://www.euronews.com/business/2026/05/27/5000-ultra-rich...
Sorry this is more an effect of your social media consumption .
I don't deny the problem the country is facing but your doom is multiplied by social media.
Touch some grass, maybe pay for traditional media and you get a view of the trade offs the government is facing. It doesnt mean you have to agree with the choice but you know...
" Industry and trade associations aren't happy either, which raises the question who asks for this? " A comprise is good if everyone involved is unhappy.
" As a German citizen let me tell you, the rate of decline this country is in is truly shocking. " Just let you know. Most AfD members share your sentiment. Maybe you should qquestion this feeling.
Buddy, I am just on HN and FetLife. Maybe get rid of your own delusions before judging strangers on their imagined social media bias.
> Most AfD members share your sentiment. Maybe you should qquestion this feeling.
I heard they also drink water. Lot's to think about.
How do you know about German news if you don't read in social media? Maybe judge your media consumption. Your thinking is very emotional and very close to Afd members.
Some kinky members are lost anyway politically.
One couldn't possibly learn German news from German news. You have to learn it from social media instead.
When you are leading manufacturing power in region and loosing markets to China while allowing external powers to destroy your energy supplies(banning nuclear and blowing Nord Stream 2).
No political bullshit will help with objective reality, being it rightoids who promise "optimizing" social spendings(while leaching on corruption) or leftoids who want to tax the rich(which will just drive factories and businesses to Poland/China/etc).
The destruction of Northstream 2 had no effect at all on the energy supply to Germany. The remaining capacity to Russia was never used over 50%, if that. Considering Russia intentionally drove up prices in the months leading up to the invasion and even rented storage capacity to keep it empty to better blackmail, there never was a sane argument for keeping the gas imports from Russia going.
Limiting supply is limiting bargaining power, you will always end up with better deal even having worse alternative option. As a buyer you want as much supply as possible.
You also want suppliers that are also motivated by financial self interest. Otherwise you end at:
“The Capitalists will sell us the rope with which we will hang them.” ― Vladimir Ilich Lenin
You could end the practice of land rent. This would encourage productive activity instead of treading economic water.
If we end rents, who will decide which land belongs to you(Berlin downtown or Shitholeburg province)?
Build enough dwellings for everyone to be able to decide
Definitely the actions of a trustworthy government /s
I'm not really sure I buy the alarm on restricting FoI requests to German citizens and EU citizens in Germany.
Should a random US citizen be able to ask a random Germany government official for data? Why?
It's not just foreign nationals that would be barred from issuing requests but non-profit organizations as well. Also, the cap on fees would be eliminated, further increasing the barriers for people wanting to issue requests.
Is there any material difference between a non-profit asking and people who work for the non-profit asking? Is the maker of the request made public or something?
It sounds like the organizations thing might just be to stop foreign nationals using that as a workaround.
I'm unsure if non-profit funds can be used in that way for a (technically) private inquiry.
Forcing you to publicly attach your name to something is often a form of intimidation.
The problem is not to restrict it to German citizens, but removing it for everything which is not a citizen, like civil rights organizations, environment organizations, and everyone else who has a legit interest to check on the governments work.
Civil rights organisations are staffed by citizens. What is the problem here?
The plans also include that you have to have some relevant personal relation with the data. This will make it unlikely that an NGO can just request any random data under their staffs name. Additionally, requests should also mirror the real costs, which could go into the thousands or even ten of thousands. This makes it harder to find legit people which are willing to take the risks, even if the NGO could cover the costs.
Of course it's also all just speculation without any real laws written yet, but the direction is there.
What is the rationale to restrict it to citizens? Do you prefer a more open or more closed society?
The US and UK let anyone in the world file a request, regardless of citizenship.
Countries that don’t usually rationalize: government is answerable primary to those it governs and taxes, limit flood of requests, some laws only extend rights to citizens of countries that offer similar rights back, worry that other governments could use it as low cost intelligence gathering, harder to charge or pursue fees.
Don't they have courts for those things? If they are receiving a flood of unreasonable requests I'm sure they could ask a judge if they really have to do them.
Define society. Is some dude in the USA, or UK part of the German society?
Can some dude in the USA or UK go to Germany?
Yeah, and?
How about the us citizen who is a permanent resident in Germany? German family? Business partners?
This is a minor point. It gives the government broad power to reject any request, associations and media outlets are excluded, it costs more and the mandatory REDACTION OF NAMES is undercutting accountability completely.
Yea, I don't give a shit wether only citizen should be able to request data.
The politicians' names are mandatorily redacted, but the requestor's name is mandatorily not redacted. Very convenient, really.
It excludes organisations and increases fees. So, if say Amnesty or Greenpeace (two NGOs opposing this act) want to FoI something, they have to get a German citizen to do it for them, possibly at considerable expense - and you bet if they try to compensate them, it'll be "foreign interference" and an excuse for suppression.
Like GDPR, the existence of FoI laws give government agencies a reason to develop systems to quickly and effortlessly give people the access they're entitled to. Given the existence of such systems (analogous to the "data takeout" systems businesses must have for PII), giving access to foreigners as well should be unproblematic. It's supposed to be public information in the first place, roadblocks have no place.
It doesn't feel nice to say but hearing from people I know who work in politics just how much the prospect of having to disclose something changes behaviour (in what people say but also where they say it) I'd be in favour of some moves like this in Britain.
There is obviously a very good reason for transparency but I think the full extent of FOI is basically like asking if someone is wearing trousers on a call