Opposition Blasts Rhineland-Palatinate Government over Low Infrastructure Investment
Mainz, Germany – Just two days after the Court of Auditors criticized Rhineland-Palatinate’s insufficient investment, the state parliament’s opposition vehemently attacked the government on the issue.
"No other federal state is allowing its infrastructure to deteriorate like Rhineland-Palatinate," said Christian Democratic Union (CDU) parliamentary group leader Gordon Schnieder in Mainz.
Schnieder attributed the situation not to the employees in the state authorities but to "leadership failure at the top." Referring to roads, bridges, and universities, he warned, "Collapse is imminent." He once again criticized the state’s high reserves.
Alternative for Germany (AfD) MP Joachim Paul spoke of dilapidated roads, public buildings, and a significant deficit in digitalization. He argued that these issues were causing substantial economic costs.
Finance Minister Doris Ahnen (Social Democratic Party of Germany, SPD) defended her government against the accusations. While acknowledging the need to increase investment, Ahnen emphasized that Rhineland-Palatinate had already taken steps in that direction. "We have an implementation problem at all levels of government," she said.
To address this, the state had launched a program to reduce bureaucracy and streamline procurement procedures. Ahnen also defended the state’s reserves, arguing that they were necessary for financial security and to avoid postponing salary increases overnight.
Pia Schellhammer, leader of the Green Party parliamentary group, also advocated for increased investment in the future. "But we will not achieve this by depleting the reserves," she said. Schellhammer criticized the CDU for its lack of understanding of sound fiscal management.
Free Democratic Party (FDP) parliamentary group leader Philipp Fernis accused Schnieder of irresponsibility for denigrating the state.
Court of Auditors’ Findings
On Tuesday, the Court of Auditors had issued a report expressing concern that Rhineland-Palatinate’s per capita debt was above average among German states, while its investment rate lagged behind. The report recommended funding new initiatives through savings, such as reducing unnecessary positions, and reducing financial assistance in favor of essential infrastructure investments.
Government Response
Ahnen rejected the Court of Auditors’ suggestion to use reserves to fund investment. She argued that this would be irresponsible and would undermine the state’s financial stability. Ahnen also emphasized that the government was already implementing measures to improve investment execution.
Opposition’s Criticism
Schnieder and Paul argued that the government’s response was insufficient. They criticized the slow pace of investment and the lack of concrete measures to address the deteriorating infrastructure. They also questioned the wisdom of maintaining high reserves while the state’s infrastructure suffered.
Conclusion
The debate over infrastructure investment in Rhineland-Palatinate is likely to continue as the state seeks to balance its fiscal responsibilities with the need to modernize its infrastructure. The Court of Auditors’ report has put pressure on the government to address the issue, and the opposition will undoubtedly maintain its scrutiny.
