Lawmakers in Schleswig-Holstein contemplating revisions to the Animal Welfare Act
Germany is currently engaged in discussions about the enforcement of stricter rules under the Infection Protection Act, with a particular focus on the uniform implementation of the "emergency brake" measures across its 16 federal states. The inconsistent usage of these measures has been a point of concern due to regional variations[1].
In November 2021, the German federal government and state premiers agreed that the hospitalization incidence (number of hospitalized COVID-19 patients per 100,000 residents over seven days) would determine pandemic restrictions under the Infection Protection Act. This replaced the criticized seven-day infection incidence[1]. Based on thresholds (3, 6, and 9 hospitalizations per 100,000), different levels of restrictions ("2G," "2G+," and further contact limitations) were to be enforced uniformly across Germany. However, in practice, the implementation has varied by state, causing criticism and calls for more standardization[1].
Chancellor Merkel and officials have emphasized the need for clear thresholds and uniform enforcement to avoid a "toothless tiger" situation where measures lack effectiveness due to inconsistent application[1]. Such variations in implementation echo other infection protection discrepancies in Germany, for example, different health certificate or hygiene instruction requirements in the catering sector across states like Berlin and Bavaria, showcasing the challenges posed by Germany's federal structure[2].
Schleswig-Holstein's Minister President, Daniel Günther, has expressed openness to stricter rules in the Infection Protection Act, but has rejected a nationwide hard lockdown due to regional differences[3]. Günther did not criticize any specific state for their handling of the pandemic in this conversation. He did not specify any new rules or measures in the conversation, but emphasized the importance of acting uniformly across the federal states[3].
Günther did not express a desire to demand stricter rules in a federal law, nor did he push for a meeting at the federal-state conference planned for Monday. He stated that he does not need new discussions, but they would implement what has already been discussed together[4]. Günther believes that citizens expect the federal states to do what is understood in the fight against the pandemic[4].
However, Günther did criticize Bavaria and Mecklenburg-Vorpommern for ordering the Russian vaccine Sputnik V without coordination[5]. The current Infection Protection Act and decisions made so far provide a framework for successfully combating the pandemic in the federal states.
Discussion remains ongoing on strengthening and harmonizing these rules to improve infection control and ensure better nationwide coordination amid the evolving COVID-19 pandemic landscape.
[1] https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuell/aktuelle-themen/aktuelles-zur-coronavirus-pandemie-1880816
[2] https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-de/aktuell/aktuelle-themen/aktuelles-zur-coronavirus-pandemie-1880816
[3] https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/gunther-corona-101.html
[4] https://www.n-tv.de/politik/gunther-widerstreit-um-corona-regeln-in-schleswig-holstein-article27089822.html
[5] https://www.tagesschau.de/inland/gunther-corona-101.html
Read also:
- Weekly happenings in the German Federal Parliament (Bundestag)
- Southwest region's most popular posts, accompanied by an inquiry:
- Discussion between Putin and Trump in Alaska could potentially overshadow Ukraine's concerns
- Tinubu's administration allegedly causing issues within every political party as Peter Obi's name surfaces - Obidient Movement asserts
