Fischer and Babler:

“Spare the country a third black-blue election”

(Bild: Reinhard Holl)

The SPÖ was founded 150 years ago on April 6. Party leader Andreas Babler and former Federal President Heinz Fischer talk about the future. 

"Krone": Mr. Babler, the welfare state is one of the greatest achievements of social democracy. In Denmark, the Social Democrats are currently making fine adjustments. For example, a public holiday has been abolished and the retirement age raised in order to maintain the welfare state. They want to expand it without cutting back. Is that still in keeping with the times? Andreas Babler: I have a differentiated view of social policy in other countries such as Denmark. Social democracy has always had the ability to combine the welfare state with modern economic and location policy. Under social democratic governments, there have been strong economic developments, a strong GDP, and under a single government it has even been possible to reduce normal working hours with full employment. For the Austrian Social Democrats, there has never been an either/or choice, but our claim is characterized by respect and justice towards people. This is also our view on the issue of pension increases. If you look at how life expectancy has risen over the last 20 years, the retirement age has actually risen faster than life expectancy. The retirement age of 65 is high enough; many people do not manage to retire from work in good health. There will be no increase in the retirement age with the SPÖ, nor will there be any pension cuts. 

Mr. Fischer, the Scandinavian way has always been more reform-minded. Is this the right path for the future?
Heinz Fischer: As far as the welfare state is concerned, I hold to the principle: don't talk about an issue until you know the figures. And the figures tell us that the concentration of wealth at the top of society is progressing rapidly. I therefore believe that if we want to have a fair society, we have to start there and not with small incomes or pensions. 

The SPÖ has always had the ability to combine the welfare state with modern economic policy.

SPÖ-Chef Andreas Babler

In Germany, SPÖ Chancellor Gerhard Schröder introduced tough reforms in the 1990s, which then benefited Angela Merkel. Neither of you think much of this pragmatism?
Fischer: Pragmatism is also part of social democracy, but an image of humanity and the principle of justice are also part of social democracy. Gerhard Schröder was a valuable interlocutor in personal discussions. But his policies were quite controversial for social democracy.
Babler: I regard this "third way" of Tony Blair and Gerhard Schröder, as it was called at the time, as a failure. Liberalization in the health sector is the most famous example, probably the nadir of this aberration of social democracy. We can see the state of the healthcare system in Great Britain.

Heinz Fischer has not forgotten his closeness to the people. During the interview, he changes sides and takes photos.

(Bild: Reinhard Holl)

How do you define pragmatism then?
Babler: The pragmatism of social democracy stems from the idea of wanting to guarantee people a good and secure life, while of course being able to support economic growth and make investments in times of crisis. If we are now calling for investments, for example the transformation fund, we are doing so because social democracy has always been able to bring about change. Whether it was the transition from the monarchy, whether it was the transformation from the disappearance of the coal industry to the metalworking industry, or whether it is now the necessary transformation towards green technology: you need pragmatism to have a perspective, to have jobs for the future and not to oversleep this process. We can reconcile transformation, which is the great privilege of social democracy, with the conviction that we humans have rights and that these must also be organized by the state.

Have you noticed that we haven't even talked about the SPÖ icon Bruno Kreisky? He is still often cited as a role model by SPÖ politicians today. Mr. Fischer, you knew Kreisky well. Would he have the same impact as chancellor today as he did in the 1970s?
Fischer : A person with the skills, talents and commitment of Bruno Kreisky, who was not born in 1911 but in 1951 or 1961, would still be an incredibly attractive politician today, because Kreisky really liked people. He had an unbelievable ability to explain his policies, and he also had a feel for people who were not interested in politics. In addition to politics, he also had an interest in art, science, literature, etc. So, a Kreisky born in 1961 would still be an outstanding head of government and statesman. That's how I see it.
Babler: Kreisky's ability to like people, as Heinz Fischer said so beautifully, connects me with him. I'm the type of person who really likes people and can also have a good effect on people who aren't particularly interested in politics. As mayor, I know people and their fates very personally and derive the tasks of politics from this. Kreisky brought about incredibly great reforms. For example, when we think of the fact that women were given equal rights in family law for the first time. I would like to make the next leap and put women on an equal footing in the labor market - namely equal pay for equal work ... Under difficult conditions - virtually full employment - Kreisky managed to reduce working hours for Austrians from 45 to 40 hours. So, 50 years later, we will be able to do the same for 4.2 million people.

Mr Babler, what moments in social democratic history have left their mark on you?
Babler: The historical role of social democracy is inevitably linked to the defense of our democracy - as in the February battles of 1934, when social democrats risked their lives to defend it. My feeling that social democracy is always on the right side of history has been confirmed once again, especially whenever there have been attacks on our democracy. The rise of Jörg Haider from 1986 onwards was one such moment that showed how important social democracy is for our country. The Social Democrats have twice played a leading role in rebuilding this republic. This is why social democracy has a strong sense of knowing when democracy is at risk. For this reason, the upcoming decision on direction is also very historic. It is important to me to protect this democracy, this republic, as we know and love it. This goal is embedded in the danger of Orbanization, the danger of this prison outlined by the FPÖ. Then there are the attacks on the independent judiciary and the independent media landscape.

Let's move on to current politics. Are we on the eve of a new SPÖ/ÖVP government?
Fischer: You have to approach this question with a certain amount of humility. The time when our parliament consisted of three parties is over. The time when the two strongest parties had 85, 90, 95 percent of the votes is even more over. We don't know today how many parties will be in the next parliament. I believe that what we can do now is not to break any porcelain, to keep channels of communication open, to prepare for a factual government program so that we can then conduct concrete negotiations. I also share the view that the Freedom Party is behaving in such a way that social democrats are forced to distance themselves from a politician like Kickl. Of course a government between the SPÖ and ÖVP is possible. If you rule that out, there is little that is viable. You can also see that the SPÖ and ÖVP have recently tried not to break too much china.
Babler: I am confident that I can assume responsibility as Federal Chancellor. I am in favor of stable variants, whatever they may look like. We have a shared history with the ÖVP in the grand coalitions of the past. The ÖVP has given up on that and has decided to move to the right. And I will of course talk to everyone, including sensible forces in the ÖVP. It is clear to us that we want to spare the country a third Black-Blue coalition, but that will only succeed if they do not have a majority.

Social Democrats are forced to distance themselves from a politician like Herbert Kickl.

Heinz Fischer über die FPÖ

Mr Fischer, doesn't it irritate you as a former Federal President that a beer party that has done no democratic work whatsoever so far is on a par with the NEOS or the Greens in the polls?
Fischer: That has nothing to do with my former position. The eight percent is not yet in the ballot boxes. But one thing that is indeed a European phenomenon is that the political glue between different groups in society is becoming more fragile and looser, which is leading to fragmentation. In Denmark and some other countries, there are significantly more parties than in Austria. The social structures of society have changed considerably. The large working class, a broad layer of farmers and the old bourgeoisie no longer exist in this form. All the more reason for the major parties to seek a common denominator. With good will, it must and will be possible to form a stable government with a foundation of values after the elections. It is our duty as democrats to contribute to this and not to sabotage or block it.

The occasion of the interview is 150 years of social democracy. You have lived through many decades of the republic. Who were the most influential chancellors of the Second Republic?
Fischer: For me, there were four historically influential chancellors in the Second Republic: Leopold Figl, Julius Raab, Kreisky and Franz Vranitzky. I do not deny the full commitment and success of the others, but I consider these four to be the most important in our recent history.