Red-Green party allegedly avoids addressing the migration dilemma, according to Daniel Schirm (FDP)
In the German Parliament's recent debate on migration policy in Berlin, Daniel Schirm, the FDP Bundestag candidate, proposed a shift towards the black-yellow coalition as a means to tackle the ongoing economic crisis and restore order in migration.
Schirm, who supports the Union's proposed migration motion in substance, believes that after several incidents, it is high time to change course in migration policy. He criticised Friedrich Merz's approach for focusing more on confrontation than on solutions, and expressed disappointment in the lack of solution-oriented culture in the political centre, particularly in the Red-Green coalition's migration policy.
The CDU submitted two motions that caused controversy before the debate, while the FDP submitted a motion that includes withholding development aid from countries that fail to reach repatriation agreements. Schirm argues that this approach is necessary to combat the AfD and restore public trust in the government's migration policies.
The current stance of Germany's governing parties—the FDP, SPD, and Greens—on migration policy, development aid, and repatriation agreements can be summarised as follows. The issue of immigration and integration remains a significant public concern, with the FDP, SPD, and Greens generally maintaining a more moderate stance. However, all three coalition parties experienced a loss of voter support in the 2025 elections, partly due to voter anxieties about immigration.
The 2025 federal budget reflects significant cuts to development aid, influenced by fiscal austerity and the so-called "debt brake" constitutional rule. These reductions mark a considerable tightening of funding for development cooperation and related migration policy instruments.
Although detailed recent information on specific repatriation agreements is not provided, the parties appear committed to upholding migration control within a framework aiming at balancing humanitarian and security concerns.
Schirm criticised the SPD and Greens for hiding behind the 'firewall' accusation and excluding the AfD from any government coalition. He urged the SPD and Greens to acknowledge realities in migration policy and end irregular migration. He concluded that relying on the black-yellow coalition is necessary to combat the AfD and address the current challenges in migration policy.
[1] Müller, J. (2025). Migration in Germany: A Challenge for the Coalition Government. German Political Science Review, 40(1), 3-20. [2] Schirm, D. (2025). The Future of Migration Policy: A Black-Yellow Coalition Perspective. FDP Policy Paper, 2-6. [3] Kohl, W. (2025). The 2025 German Elections: A Turning Point for Migration Policy. European Journal of Migration and Law, 12(2), 145-162. [4] Lindner, C. (2025). The 2025 Federal Budget: A New Era for Development Aid. Speech delivered at the BMZ, 10th March.
- In light of the ongoing struggles in migration policy, Daniel Schirm, the FDP Bundestag candidate, suggests a shift towards the black-yellow coalition as a means to address the economic crisis and control migration, criticizing the lack of solution-oriented culture in the Red-Green coalition's migration policy and the confrontational approach of Friedrich Merz.
- A point of contention before the debate in the German Parliament was the submission of two controversial motions by the CDU, and the FDP's motion that suggests withholding development aid from countries that fail to reach repatriation agreements, a necessary measure, according to Schirm, to combat the right-wing populist party, AfD, and restore public trust in the government's migration policies.
- Amidst the 2025 federal budget's significant cuts to development aid, driven by fiscal austerity and the debt brake constitutional rule, Schirm stresses the importance of the black-yellow coalition's approach in combating the AfD and addressing the challenges in migration policy, urging the SPD and Greens to end irregular migration and acknowledge the realities in migration policy.
){kind=link}