Almanya

Federal State Election Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania 2026

Bündnis-C

Bündnis90/Grüne

Die Linke

Die PARTEI

Freie Wähler

Handwerkerpartei

ÖDP

Piratenpartei

Team Freiheit

Tierschutzpartei

Volt

Since the start of Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine in 2022, Germany and other countries have imposed sanctions on Russia. These include, amongst other things, trade restrictions on Russian energy resources such as oil, gas and coal, restrictions on Russian banks’ access to the international financial market, and the freezing of Russian assets. These sanctions are intended, on the one hand, to punish Russia for its actions in breach of international law and, on the other hand, to weaken it economically in order to bring the war to an end more quickly.

Critics are calling for the sanctions against Russia to be lifted. Some argue that this would, amongst other things, allow cheaper gas to be supplied from Russia once again. Other critics also doubt that the sanctions are significantly weakening Russia’s war economy. Furthermore, they see the lifting of sanctions as an opportunity to initiate new negotiations aimed at bringing the war to an end.

The Abitur is the highest school-leaving qualification in Germany. So far, there is no standardized high school diploma for the entire country. the individual federal states determine their own exams and, in some cases, their own grading criteria.

Some people want to change this. They argue that a nationwide standardized Abitur would make student performance more comparable—for instance, for the benefit of universities—by ensuring that all students face the same requirements. It could also make the transition easier for students moving to a different federal state.

Opponents of a standardized Abitur point out that education in Germany is the responsibility of the federal states and insist that it remain so. They argue that the states are better able to align educational standards and exams with their specific school systems. A uniform *Abitur* exam could restrict regional variations and diverse teaching approaches.

A ban on smartphones in schools aims to reduce distractions and negative influences on children. Proponents argue that this would foster concentration and social interaction.

Opponents, on the other hand, believe that children should learn how to use digital media at an early age. They argue that it would be better to integrate the meaningful use of smartphones into classroom instruction.

Almost all federal states have a debt ratio exceeding ten percent, meaning their accumulated debt amounts to more than one-tenth of their annual economic output. Only Baden-Württemberg, Bavaria, and Saxony have lower debt levels in relative terms.

Some view this high level of debt as a risk to future economic prospects. Consequently, certain economic experts call for the states to stop incurring new debt. They argue that high debt leads to rising interest costs in the long run, thereby leaving less funding available for education, infrastructure, and social services. Furthermore, states with high debt levels might have less room for maneuver during economic crises.

Others counter that strictly avoiding new debt can hinder necessary investments. If insufficient funds are allocated to infrastructure, education, and digitalization, schools, transport networks, and public facilities could fall into further disrepair. In the long term, this could place a greater strain on economic development than the debt itself.

Germany has a wealth tax, though its collection has been suspended since 1995. If it were to be levied again on a regular basis, individuals with substantial assets would have to pay higher taxes.

To determine this, an individual's total assets—such as real estate, cars, or business holdings—would first be calculated. The tax amount would then be set based on this total value. Under current law, the tax rate is 1.0 percent for individuals and 0.5 percent for business assets.

However, the wealth tax would not apply to everyone; it would only be levied once a certain asset threshold is reached.

Since the wealth tax is a federal tax, individual federal states cannot reactivate it on their own. They can, however, advocate in the Bundesrat (Federal Council) for its reintroduction nationwide.

Opponents of reintroduction argue that wealth is often derived from income that has already been taxed. They also consider the administrative burden excessive, noting that some assets are difficult to value or fluctuate significantly in price—such as cryptocurrencies or stocks. Furthermore, they emphasize that possessing substantial assets does not automatically mean a person has a large amount of cash at their disposal; for instance, owning a house or a business stake does not necessarily provide the immediately available funds needed to pay the wealth tax.

Proponents counter that a wealth tax can help reduce wealth inequality. It would ensure that the wealthiest individuals contribute more significantly to funding government functions. The additional revenue could be used for areas such as education, infrastructure, or social services, thereby benefiting people with lower incomes as well.

Anyone buying a house, an apartment, or a plot of land in Germany must pay real estate transfer tax. Each federal state determines the rate itself; depending on the state, it ranges from 3.5 to 6.5 percent of the purchase price.

Proponents of a reduction to 3.5 percent argue that this would make purchasing a home more affordable. They hope that more people would then be able to afford to buy a house or an apartment.

Opponents counter that real estate transfer tax is a crucial source of revenue for the federal states. They fear that a reduction would leave less money available for areas such as education, roads, and public administration. Furthermore, they argue that it is uncertain whether lower taxes would actually lead to lower real estate prices.

Public property belongs to the state—specifically, for instance, to a federal state or a city. Examples include hospitals, housing, and utility companies. Privatization occurs when such facilities or properties are sold to private companies.

When public property is privatized, proponents often argue that private companies can manage public facilities more efficiently. They anticipate increased investment, faster decision-making, and more cost-effective operations. Evidence of productivity gains is found primarily in sectors characterized by competition and clear state-imposed regulations.

However, there is no proof of a general efficiency advantage for private providers; the outcome depends heavily on the specific sector involved. Opponents also fear that economic interests will take precedence over the provision of essential public services. They warn that the quality of services—such as healthcare or housing—could suffer, or that important offerings could be curtailed.

Abortion is regulated by law in Germany. In principle, abortion is unlawful under Section 218 of the Criminal Code. Since 1995, Section 218a has specified the circumstances under which an abortion may be performed without criminal penalty—for instance, following mandatory counseling and within the first twelve weeks after conception. Further exceptions apply if the pregnant woman's life or health is at risk or if the pregnancy resulted from rape.

However, the federal states play a role in organizing hospital care and can issue directives for hospitals under their administration. Consequently, there is an ongoing debate as to whether state-run hospitals should be required to offer abortion services.

Proponents argue that this would give women easier access to a legally permitted medical service. They also contend that it could reduce regional disparities in service availability and strengthen the right to self-determination.

Opponents counter that hospitals and medical staff should not be compelled to perform abortions. They argue that doctors should be free to decide for themselves whether to carry out such procedures. Furthermore, they point to organizational and personal reasons that might argue against such a mandate.

"Citizen work" refers to community-service activities that individuals are expected to undertake when they have been unemployed for an extended period. Examples include maintaining parks, providing support in social institutions, or performing other tasks for the benefit of the community.

Proponents argue that this allows the long-term unemployed to regain work experience and facilitates their re-entry into the labor market. They also view it as a form of reciprocity for the state support received.

Opponents counter that no one should be compelled to perform such work. They fear that it could displace regular jobs. Furthermore, they point out that the reasons for long-term unemployment vary widely and that a mandatory work requirement does not solve these underlying issues.

For many applications—whether related to construction, business, or other administrative matters—citizens and companies must wait for a decision from the authorities. The proposal stipulates that an application is automatically deemed approved if the responsible authority fails to make a decision within six months.

Proponents argue that this could reduce long waiting times, cut red tape, and allow projects to be implemented more quickly.

Opponents counter that some applications require careful scrutiny. They fear that automatic approvals could lead to errors or result in a failure to adequately assess important environmental, construction, or health and safety standards.

In Germany, most shops remain closed on Sundays and public holidays. This is regulated by law. However, there are exceptions—for instance, for petrol stations, bakeries, or specific Sundays when shops are permitted to open.

Proponents argue that longer opening hours offer greater flexibility for shopping. They also suggest that this could boost sales and strengthen the retail sector.

Opponents counter that Sundays and public holidays should remain days of rest. They argue that employees need time for family, friends, and relaxation. Furthermore, they fear that regular Sunday opening could put smaller shops under pressure.

Since the beginning of 2020, childcare in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania has been completely free of charge for parents.

The state covers the costs for crèches, kindergartens, day care, and after-school care for up to ten hours a day.

The state finances this care primarily from its own funds, supplemented by federal money.

Proponents emphasize the significant financial relief for families; on average, parents save around 18,000 euros by the time a child starts school.

This noticeably eases the burden on household budgets and makes it easier for parents to balance work and family life.

Furthermore, the absence of fees promotes equal opportunity, as every child receives support regardless of their parents' income.

Critics, however, point to the high costs incurred by the state. They argue that available funds should instead be invested directly in the quality of childcare facilities.

In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, a single educator is responsible for a comparatively large number of children. Consequently, experts and opposition parties argue that smaller groups and more staff would be more important than fee-free care.

Additionally, high-earning parents—who could easily afford the fees—also benefit from the policy.

In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, compulsory schooling begins at around age six. There is currently no mandatory preschool year.

In the year before starting school, children can attend a daycare center, where they receive preparation for school.

Arguments in favor of a mandatory preschool year include the fact that children could receive language support and other assistance at an early stage.

This could be beneficial for children who speak little German at home or require special support. All children would start school on a more equal footing.

Hamburg already has a system of mandatory support for children with a significant need for language development.

Arguments against it include the fact that not every child needs an additional mandatory year. Some parents prefer to care for their children at home or consider daycare sufficient.

Furthermore, the state would need to provide enough places and qualified staff. Many daycare centers are already facing staff shortages.

Strictly speaking, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania has not had a three-tiered school system—consisting of *Hauptschule*, *Realschule*, and *Gymnasium*—since 2002.

At that time, the *Hauptschule* and *Realschule* were merged into the *Regionale Schule* (regional school). Today, the state operates a two-tiered system.

After the first four years of primary school, all students attend grades five and six together; this period is known as the *Orientierungsstufe* (orientation stage).

Afterward, students generally transfer either to the *Regionale Schule* or the *Gymnasium*. Comprehensive schools (*Gesamtschulen*) are also an option.

Current debates regarding the preservation of this structure focus primarily on whether students should be separated after grade six or continue learning together for longer.

Proponents of separate school types emphasize the benefits of targeted support, noting that students learn at different paces and possess varying aptitudes.

At the *Gymnasium*, high-achieving students can receive targeted preparation for university studies.

In contrast, the *Regionale Schule* places greater emphasis on practical preparation for the workforce.

Separate school types also allow teachers to tailor instruction more precisely to the class's specific academic level.

Opponents of the tiered system, however, advocate for a longer period of shared learning—for instance, in *Gemeinschaftsschulen* (community schools).

They criticize the separation after grade six as premature, arguing that a child's development is not yet fully determined at that stage.

Furthermore, educational success in Germany remains heavily dependent on a student's family background. In a shared learning environment, students who struggle academically benefit from their higher-achieving peers.

This fosters social cohesion and ensures that all children have equal opportunities for advancement up to the tenth grade.

A proposal has been made for an interest-free start-up loan of 1,500 euros for young people beginning their initial vocational training in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.

The loan would initially have to be repaid. However, under the proposal, those who remain in the state to work after completing their training would not be required to pay it back.

Arguments in favor of the loan include the fact that starting vocational training often entails costs—such as expenses for housing, commuting, work clothing, or study materials.

A sum of 1,500 euros could help cover these initial expenses. The scheme might also encourage more young people to begin their training in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania and stay in the state afterward.

Arguments against the loan point out that even an interest-free loan represents debt. Young people with limited financial means, in particular, might feel pressured by this.

Critics argue that those in need of support should instead receive a grant that does not require repayment.

Furthermore, financial assistance for commuting and accommodation costs, as well as the "Azubi-Deutschlandticket" (a discounted nationwide public transport pass for apprentices), is already available.

Nord Stream 2 consists of two natural gas pipelines running from Russia to Lubmin in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.

One pipeline was damaged in 2022; according to available information, the other remained intact.

The pipeline never entered service. German certification was halted prior to the Russian attack on Ukraine.

Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania cannot unilaterally decide to carry out repairs today.

Since 2025, EU sanctions have prohibited transactions related to the completion, operation, maintenance, or use of Nord Stream.

Exceptions are permitted only if work is necessary to prevent environmental or safety risks.

Proponents advocate for repairs to preserve the pipeline as a potential energy supply reserve.

They hope for lower gas prices in the future and benefits for Lubmin as an energy hub.

Repairs could also prevent gas from leaking out of damaged pipes into the Baltic Sea.

Arguments against this include the fact that restarting the pipeline would once again increase Germany's dependence on Russian gas.

Critics view this as a security risk and a step backward in the move away from fossil fuels. The EU sanctions are explicitly intended to prevent gas deliveries via Nord Stream.

Tasers are conducted energy devices designed to temporarily incapacitate attackers using electric shocks. There is ongoing debate regarding whether patrol officers should be equipped with these devices on a widespread basis.

Proponents argue that Tasers bridge the gap between batons and lethal service weapons. They enable officers to stop violent attackers from a safe distance without having to resort immediately to a firearm.

Critics, however, warn that their use carries significant health risks, such as cardiac complications or injuries from falling. There is also a danger that Tasers might be deployed too quickly or rashly—including in situations that could have been resolved through de-escalation rather than force.

In Germany, the rule to date is that children under the age of 14 are not criminally liable.

This means they cannot be charged in court or punished under criminal law.

If a 12- or 13-year-old commits a crime, it is the youth welfare office—not a judge—that intervenes.

Possible consequences include mandatory educational counseling, psychological support, or, in serious cases, placement in a residential care facility.

Proponents of lowering the age to 12 call for a tougher state response. They point to crime statistics showing that younger children are increasingly committing serious offenses.

They argue that many 12-year-olds today are more mature than in the past and fully understand their actions.

Earlier intervention by the criminal justice system is intended to better protect victims, hold young offenders accountable sooner, and set clear boundaries for them.

Opponents of lowering the age, however, emphasize that 12-year-olds cannot yet fully grasp the consequences of their actions.

Experts in psychology and the legal system warn against treating children like criminals at too early an age.

They argue that punishment would not prevent violent acts but would instead jeopardize the children's development.

Furthermore, they maintain that existing measures available to youth welfare services and family courts are entirely sufficient for taking firm action without resorting to criminal law.

In Germany, more than 300,000 people with disabilities work in specialized workshops.

Legally, they are not currently classified as regular employees; instead, they hold a status described as "employee-like."

Consequently, the statutory minimum wage does not apply to them. Instead, they receive workshop remuneration, which averages slightly more than 200 euros per month.

As a result, many workers receive additional state support, such as basic income security or a pension for reduced earning capacity.

Proponents of a minimum wage argue that work is work. Anyone manufacturing products or providing services in a workshop is performing genuine, valuable work. A minimum wage signifies recognition and offers protection against poverty.

Furthermore, the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities calls for fair pay for everyone.

Opponents counter that these workshops are not purely commercial enterprises but rather protected environments designed for care and personal development. The resources required for support are substantial, and the work performed is not directly comparable to that of the regular labor market.

If workshops were required to pay the minimum wage, many would be unable to cover the costs from their own earnings. Moreover, the minimum wage would often be offset against other state benefits.

Ultimately, many workers would be left with little extra money at their disposal.

In Germany, the federal states decide for themselves on the rules governing radio, television, and online media. To do this, they enter into joint agreements.

The State Media Treaty applies throughout Germany and establishes the framework for all media providers.

The NDR State Treaty specifically regulates the cooperation of the four federal states—Hamburg, Lower Saxony, Schleswig-Holstein, and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania—regarding the *Norddeutscher Rundfunk* (NDR).

In principle, any federal state can terminate these treaties. However, the Basic Law mandates the existence of an independent public service media system in Germany.

Thus, while a state can terminate the state treaties, it is still required to provide its citizens with media services that comply with the constitution.

Proponents of termination call for a fundamental reform of public service broadcasting.

They argue that the current system is outdated and far too expensive, claiming that the monthly broadcasting contribution places an unnecessary financial burden on citizens.

Critics also accuse the broadcasters of failing to report neutrally and of being too close to the political establishment.

Terminating the state treaties is intended to increase pressure to drastically downsize public service broadcasting and cut costs.

Opponents of termination emphasize the vital importance of public service broadcasting for democracy.

Independent media provide oversight of the political system and deliver reliable information, which helps protect society against targeted disinformation.

A withdrawal by Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania would also jeopardize regional news coverage; dedicated state-level radio and television programs could be eliminated entirely without replacement.

Furthermore, legal experts point out that termination would lead to lengthy legal proceedings. The broadcasting contribution would not automatically be abolished as a result, because the state remains legally obligated to ensure the provision of adequate media services.

Currently, around eleven percent of agricultural land in Germany is farmed organically.

The federal government has set a goal of increasing this share to 30 percent by 2030.

To this end, the Ministry of Agriculture has developed a dedicated organic farming strategy. The European Union also aims to significantly expand organic farming, targeting an EU-wide share of 25 percent by 2030.

Proponents highlight the benefits for the environment and nature. Organic farming eschews chemical pesticides and artificial fertilizers; this protects groundwater from pollutants and enhances soil fertility.

Furthermore, organic fields exhibit significantly higher biodiversity among plants, insects, and birds. Strict regulations ensuring more space and outdoor access for livestock are also cited as a key contribution to animal welfare.

Critics primarily point to lower yields per hectare compared to conventional farming. Producing the same quantity of food requires more land in organic farming.

This can increase pressure on undeveloped land and forests. In addition, organic food is more expensive to produce, resulting in higher prices for consumers at the supermarket checkout.

There is also a risk that domestic farmers could be left with unsold stocks of their more expensive products if consumer purchasing power is lacking.

For several years, wolves have been making a comeback in Germany. The debate centers on whether the wolf population should be actively managed and whether limits on their numbers should be lowered through simplified culling permits.

Proponents argue that management measures protect livestock—such as sheep and cattle—from attacks, thereby safeguarding the agricultural sector and shielding animals in pastures from constant predation.

Critics, however, emphasize that the wolf is a strictly protected species and plays a vital role in the ecological balance. Targeted culling jeopardizes species conservation efforts. Instead of reducing the population, they argue, the focus should be on better herd protection—such as fencing and livestock guardian dogs—and on providing rapid compensation payments to affected livestock owners.

Should Germany halt deportations to Syria and Afghanistan? This is a subject of heated political debate.

The legal situation is clearly defined. Under the Basic Law and international treaties, no one may be deported to a country where they face the threat of torture or death. This applies even to individuals who have committed crimes.

At the same time, the rule in Germany is that anyone denied asylum is generally required to leave the country.

In recent years, deportations to these two countries have mostly been suspended due to the dangerous conditions there. Recently, however, there have been isolated instances of convicted offenders being deported.

Proponents of a deportation ban argue that cruelty and arbitrary rule prevail in countries like Afghanistan and Syria, and that anyone sent back there faces mortal danger.

Furthermore, deportations to these countries require negotiating with dictators or radical groups such as the Taliban—actions many oppose because they would legitimize such rulers.

Additionally, the right to life protects all individuals, regardless of their actions.

Opponents of a deportation ban take a different view, emphasizing the need for security in Germany. They argue that anyone who commits serious crimes or is deemed dangerous forfeits their right to protection.

Such individuals must leave the country promptly. Doing so protects the German population and strengthens confidence in the rule of law, while also demonstrating that German laws are consistently enforced.

In the German public sector, there are two distinct groups of employees: civil servants (*Beamte*) and salaried public employees (*Tarifangestellte*).

Civil servants have special rights and obligations. They cannot be dismissed, are prohibited from striking, and receive a state-funded pension upon retirement.

Salaried employees work under standard employment contracts. They contribute to the statutory pension scheme and have the right to strike.

The Basic Law stipulates that tasks involving the exercise of state authority should generally be performed by civil servants. This applies primarily to the police, the judiciary, tax investigation units, and schools.

Proponents of hiring more salaried employees point primarily to the costs involved. The state pays civil servant pensions entirely out of tax revenue, placing a heavy burden on future budgets.

In contrast, salaried employees make monthly contributions to the statutory pension insurance system, which strengthens the pension scheme for all citizens. Furthermore, employment contracts for salaried staff can be adjusted more flexibly.

Opponents emphasize the importance of state security and stability. Because civil servants are barred from striking, the state continues to function reliably even during crises; police and fire services remain ready for action at all times.

Additionally, the civil service system offers protection against corruption and political interference.

The incentives associated with civil servant status help the state attract qualified professionals, given that the private sector often offers higher salaries.

The cost of meals in daycare centers and schools represents a significant financial burden for many families. There is an ongoing debate about whether all children should be provided with a completely free daily lunch in these settings.

Proponents argue that free lunches relieve the financial strain on families and help reduce social inequalities. Furthermore, a reliable, healthy meal ensures that all children are well-nourished—something proven to boost concentration and academic performance during the school day.

Critics, however, emphasize that covering meal costs across the board places an enormous financial burden on state and municipal budgets. They argue that government support should be targeted at low-income families rather than providing blanket funding that includes high-income households.

Recognized refugees are permitted to work immediately in Germany.

The situation is different for individuals whose asylum proceedings are still ongoing; they are generally subject to an initial three-month ban on working.

Those required to continue living in an initial reception center are often barred from working for up to six months.

Access to the labor market from day one would need to be regulated at the federal level. While Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania could advocate for this in the Bundesrat, it cannot change the rules on its own.

Arguments in favor of immediate access include the fact that refugees could earn their own money sooner and would be less dependent on state support.

Work aids in language acquisition, familiarization with daily life, and the establishment of social contacts. Companies could also fill job vacancies and apprenticeship positions more easily.

Critics, however, prefer to wait until the asylum process is concluded. They fear that individuals whose applications have been rejected would be harder to persuade to leave the country if they are already employed.

Others argue that, during the initial weeks, authorities should first clarify matters regarding identity, accommodation, and potential security issues.

There is ongoing debate in Germany regarding the expansion of wind turbines. Currently, there is no outright ban on turbines near residential areas.

Instead, construction is governed by strict environmental regulations. A wind turbine may only be erected if established limits for noise and shadow flicker are met.

In recent years, individual federal states have been permitted to set their own minimum distance requirements—such as a distance of around 1,000 meters from residential buildings.

However, new federal laws are increasingly relaxing these blanket distance rules. The aim is to open up more land for clean energy generation.

Those who favor a ban near residential areas primarily want to protect local residents. Large turbine rotors generate noise and cast shadows.
Many people find this intrusive and worry about potential health impacts.

The visual impact on the landscape is another point of contention. Proponents of minimum distances also fear that homes located near wind turbines could lose value.

Those who oppose a blanket ban point primarily to the need for climate action. Germany requires large amounts of electricity from renewable sources.

Strict distance regulations, however, significantly reduce the amount of land available for development. A total ban on turbines near residential areas would make it impossible to build many necessary installations.

Furthermore, opponents of a ban emphasize that modern wind turbines are becoming quieter and that existing protective laws already provide adequate safeguards for citizens on a case-by-case basis.

EU environmental regulations often set minimum standards. A so-called "one-to-one" implementation would mean Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania adopts only what the European Union requires.

In principle, there would be no additional state-level rules beyond that. EU regulations apply directly anyway.

In the case of EU directives, however, the federal and state governments must transpose the requirements into German law.

Arguments in favor of one-to-one implementation include the fact that businesses, farmers, and municipalities would face fewer additional rules and less bureaucracy.

Proponents argue that companies in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania should not be subject to stricter obligations than companies in other EU countries, as this could facilitate investment and reduce costs.

Arguments against it include the fact that EU minimum standards may not be sufficient to address all regional issues.

Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania is home to many peatlands, coastal waters, and valuable natural areas; stricter state regulations could offer them better protection.

Furthermore, regulations that are too lax can prove costly in the long run. Damage caused by water pollution, degraded ecosystems, or the consequences of climate change often has to be remedied using taxpayer money.

The question, therefore, is: Should Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania avoid additional environmental regulations as much as possible? Or should the state be permitted to enact stricter rules if they offer better protection for nature and public health?

State agencies for the protection of the constitution monitor individuals and groups that seek to harm democracy. To do this, the agency employs covert methods.

For instance, it intercepts communications or deploys undercover agents. Because the agency operates in secret, the state parliament oversees its work.

Each federal state has a special committee of lawmakers for this purpose. These elected representatives meet in private; they are authorized to review files and question agency staff.

However, some politicians and experts are calling for greater oversight powers for this committee.

Advocates of stricter oversight point to citizens' fundamental rights, noting that an agency with secret powers can easily abuse its authority.

Effective oversight of the agency helps prevent scandals and strengthens public trust in the state.

Moreover, lawmakers currently often lack the time and dedicated staff needed to thoroughly examine every operation.

Granting more powers and additional staff would make the oversight process more thorough and independent.

Opponents of increased oversight warn of risks to internal security. The agency can only monitor extremists effectively if its methods remain confidential.

Sharing too much information with parliament increases the risk of leaks. This could endanger informants and cause investigations to fail.

Furthermore, the agency is already subject to oversight by courts, data protection commissioners, and parliament. Additional restrictions could hinder its work and slow down responses to acute threats.

Currently, a European regulation governs the transport of livestock. It mandates rest periods, feeding schedules, and minimum space requirements on trucks.

However, there is no total ban on long-distance transport in either Germany or the European Union. Exports to countries outside the EU also continue to take place.

Those who support a ban point to the severe suffering of the animals. Transports often last for days or weeks, with animals confined in cramped conditions and exposed to extreme heat.

Long delays frequently occur at borders outside the European Union, where it is difficult to enforce German and European animal welfare standards.

Many animals are injured or die during the journey.

Proponents therefore call for the transport of meat or breeding material—such as semen—instead of live animals.

Opponents of a ban are primarily concerned about the economic impact on farmers; selling breeding animals abroad generates vital revenue for many agricultural businesses.

They also argue that global demand for livestock will persist. If Europe stops supplying animals, buyers will simply source their stock from countries with significantly poorer animal welfare standards.

Thus, a ban would harm the domestic agricultural sector without actually improving animal welfare on a global scale.

The Bundeswehr and military affairs fall under federal jurisdiction. The federal government decides where barracks and training grounds are to be expanded or newly constructed.

However, the state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania can actively support this expansion—for example, by expediting building permits, providing suitable road and rail infrastructure, or adjusting regional planning.

Due to the changing security situation in Europe, the Bundeswehr plans to expand, requiring more space and personnel.

Consequently, the federal government has halted the conversion of former military sites into civilian areas in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania; these sites remain reserved for the Bundeswehr for the time being.

Proponents argue that expanding these locations strengthens the security of Germany and its partner nations. Situated on the Baltic Sea, Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania holds significant strategic military importance.

Furthermore, the Bundeswehr brings money and jobs to the region. Additional soldiers and staff support local purchasing power and benefit local tradespeople and businesses.

Critics, however, view the expansion as problematic. If land is tied up for military use, it is no longer available to cities and municipalities.

This prevents them from developing new commercial zones, housing, or solar parks.

In addition, some fear an excessive focus on the military and call instead for more funding for civilian projects and peacekeeping efforts.

"Gender-inclusive language" can refer to various practices. These include paired forms (such as *Schülerinnen und Schüler*—female and male students), gender-neutral terms (such as *Lehrkräfte*—teaching staff), and special characters like the asterisk, colon, or underscore.

In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, there is currently no requirement to use special characters for gender-inclusive language. Schools are bound by the official rules of German orthography; asterisks, colons, and underscores are not part of these rules. However, students do not automatically have these characters marked as errors.

In public administration, language is intended to reflect gender equality. The state primarily recommends using paired forms and neutral terms for this purpose, rather than special characters. There are currently no plans for a general ban.

Arguments in favor of a ban include the desire for uniform and easily readable language. Proponents argue that schools should strictly adhere to official spelling rules and that no one should be forced to use special characters or specific pauses in speech.

Arguments against a ban include the concern that it could severely restrict teachers and public authorities, even though their aim in using these forms is to address people of all genders.

Critics also point out that so-called gender-inclusive language does not rely on asterisks or colons; paired forms and neutral terms could potentially also be affected by a ban.

A new "Baukindergeld" (child-related housing subsidy) for Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania has been proposed. Families would receive 15,000 euros for each child under the age of 18 upon the initial purchase or construction of a home—whether an apartment or a house—intended for their own use.

Unlike the previous federal housing subsidy, this scheme would also apply if a child is born after the family has already moved in.

Arguments in favor include the fact that many families fail to purchase a home due to a lack of equity; the subsidy could make financing easier.

Proponents also hope that this measure will encourage young families to stay in—or move to—Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, potentially strengthening rural regions in particular.

Arguments against the plan point out that such a subsidy primarily benefits families who could already afford to buy a home. Families with very low incomes often do not benefit because they are unable to secure a loan.

Studies on the previous federal subsidy also warned of "windfall effects," where the state pays families who would have purchased a home regardless. Furthermore, a portion of the subsidy can end up driving up real estate prices.

The subsidy would also require significant amounts of tax revenue. Critics argue that these funds could instead be invested in affordable rental housing, schools, or daycare centers.

The question, therefore, is: Should the state support families with 15,000 euros per child to help them purchase a home? Or should it focus its resources more heavily on affordable rental housing?

Support this project