MIGRATION: "Reduce pull factors" - Engelhardt calls for change in asylum policy after Solingen

After the Solingen attack, the federal government wants to hold cross-party talks about the consequences. Federal Chancellor Olaf Scholz has announced that he will bring the federal states and Union representatives on board. According to a report in the Bild newspaper, there is now debate about drastically reducing support for certain asylum seekers. People who entered via another EU country and were registered there should only receive the most necessary benefits in kind. I want to talk about that. Christian Engelhardt from the CDU is involved , he is district administrator for the Bergstrasse district in Hesse. Beautiful good day. Beautiful good day. So obviously the “bed-bread-soap” strategy is now being discussed. What do you say to that? Would that be the right path, perhaps even the solution to all your problems? This is certainly not the solution to all of our problems. And perhaps first of all: whenever something happens, and in this case too, a wide variety of suggestions come relatively quickly as to what can be done. It's also good that after events like the one in Solingen, people are thinking about what can be changed about refugee policy. But when these suggestions come from the federal government, like from Mr. Lindner, who is an essential part of the federal government, then I ask myself why suggestions keep coming but in the end so little happens. This is very frustrating for us local actors, who at the end of the food chain have to ensure that this refugee situation is well managed . There is a lot of talk, there is argument, but there is far too little actual action. That's why my very first appeal is: It would be important that the many things that have already been planned and discussed, which you can read about everywhere for more than a year, are actually tackled and not just put forward as demands. Yes, and then: We municipalities have been saying for more than a year that work should be done to reduce the pull factors, including reducing cash benefits. That's why the payment card has been in demand for a long time and the tender for it is currently underway. It is of course logical to think about reducing benefits for those who we know should actually be on their way back, for example to another country through which they entered. Especially when, as in the Solingen case, it is someone who deliberately thwarted the repatriation. Why should we then provide special support to someone who is no longer supposed to be here and who has actively contributed to the fact that he is still there, contrary to the legal situation? But there is much more to do. In the last few days I have not only been frustrated because we have once again seen that this refugee situation with the many people who come to us, the lack of resources for integration work, the lack of resources to enforce the state, is looking for more After a year of discussion it is still as it is. What is your reality like at the moment, Mr. Engelhardt? Why do people come to Germany? What do you specifically experience, and yes, how do people behave when they are actually with you? And to what extent do you still have room for more? Fortunately, after fewer people were assigned in the last few months, at least in Hesse , we have been able to breathe a little. That means we could accommodate people, but that's only the most minor issue. Accommodating people, in the end it's about being able to integrate the people who can stay here. The resources for this are actually lacking , they are massively lacking. There is a lack of human resources and a lack of opportunities to actually look after and integrate refugees. That's exactly why it's crucial that those who aren't allowed to stay here are brought back quickly so that we can concentrate our resources on those who we know will stay with us. That, in my opinion, is the key to the entire discussion. We must come to a rapid separation of those those who are not allowed to stay here and those who are allowed to stay. Now you have just touched on the topic again, pull factors. You also said that you have been calling for pull factors to be reduced for a long time. What do you think are the biggest pull factors? Of course, one of the things that happens here is that the people here, the refugees, receive a relatively large amount of money, because it is based on what other benefit recipients such as citizens' benefit recipients receive. There are deductions, but it's more than many people could possibly earn in their home countries, and in my opinion that's such a pull factor. That's why the payment card should come, and that was a very right decision by the government. However, there are currently problems with the procurement process when introducing the payment card , which is why it is not there yet. Of course, the refugees also know that our procedures are so inefficient that even if you have no claim, you can end up staying here. Word gets around, and in the end it is of course also a factor that contributes to the fact that people, even if they know that they are not actually allowed to stay here according to our legal system, still set off because in practice functions. If, on the other hand, the repatriation were to work very quickly, if you knew that you would come to Germany and then soon find yourself in your home country , then the word would gradually spread and there would be fewer people who had no legal right to a right to remain have in Germany. We see it with our neighbors, the Swedes. They were a country of immigration for a long time, but through very restrictive policies they managed to become more of a country of emigration. Would that perhaps be a blueprint that could be used here in Germany? I do believe that you can be much more restrictive than we are. In the end, I don't want a restrictive policy, but a realistic policy. I think we should use the words accordingly. We have a society that likes to help people who are in need, and I would like to do that too, but to the people who are really in need. So the people who are actually politically persecuted, who actually come from a war, who actually have a right to stay under our legal system. We have to be so realistic that we recognize that too many people come to us and that we cannot really help the people who are legitimately coming to us because our resources for integration are not sufficient. That's why in my opinion it's not a question of restriction, but of realism. My wish would be that the repatriation happens faster, that the people who have to go back are actually repatriated, that it is not the case that if someone resists being flown out, they can then stay at the airport, but that they may then also be with them coercion is returned. This is something that our state must be able to achieve if it wants to be a recognizably resilient and assertive state, says Christian Engelhardt. Thank you very much for this conversation.