Vienna state parliament

Campaigning debate on minimum income

The Vienna City Council

(Bild: APA/Barbara Gindl)

Social balance and fairness were the topics of a heated special session in the Vienna state parliament. In addition to the minimum income as the actual topic, it was unmistakably also about profiling ahead of the National Council elections.

Vienna's mayor and governor Michael Ludwig as a "wrecker of the welfare state" - the title of the FPÖ special session on minimum income in the state parliament also set the tone for most of the speeches. In addition to the minimum income, all parties were clearly also concerned with positioning themselves in the national election campaign.

"It's simply about fairness"
Vienna's FPÖ leader Dominik Nepp said that some of the sums paid out in the minimum income scheme were "so high that anyone who gets up in the morning and goes to work is disappointed and angry". It is "not about envy or a dispute between rich and poor or Austrians and non-Austrians. It's simply about fairness. At the same time, Nepp clearly committed to a "solidarity-based system". Everyone understands that you have to pay taxes, "but I can expect that the money will be used responsibly."

This cannot be in the interests of the SPÖ, which always says that the working population must be supported

Wiens FPÖ-Chef Dominik Nepp

Bild: krone.tv

The ÖVP also finds the structure of the minimum income in Vienna "inexplicable, not logical, not fair and not social". Politicians must restore a "balanced relationship between income without benefits and income with benefits". The city government also has a number of levers at its disposal to achieve this: for example, the minimum benefit could be graduated on a decreasing scale for shared flats and multi-child families. In its current form, however, it is "the best advertisement for every trafficking organization from the Balkans to the Hindu Kush".

We are committed to supporting people in need, but a sensible middle ground has been lost

Caroline Hungerländer, ÖVP

Bild: Peter Tomschi

For their part, the SPÖ and NEOS referred to the federal government and the former turquoise-blue government. Not only did they abolish the integration year, but with the end of a nationwide social welfare law in 2019, they also "produced a social policy patchwork for purely populist reasons", which is now leading to excessive burdens for Vienna. NEOS mandatary Jörg Konrad said that "what always happens when populists come to power has happened, namely technical and political chaos".

SPÖ and NEOS point to turquoise-blue legacy
Konrad emphasized that there is certainly room for improvement in the current form of the minimum income scheme. The federal government was responsible for measures such as central administration of the minimum income by the AMS, more benefits in kind, especially for large families and, above all, penalties for federal states that have disregarded their asylum quota for years. The SPÖ also accused the FPÖ in particular of wanting to "explain to the poor that money should be taken away from even poorer people".

The Greens also defended the city government for not taking part in the social dumping of other federal states and for being the only federal state to follow the EU-SILC criteria that apply throughout Europe in the fight against poverty. The party also emphasized that large sums in minimum benefits are only paid out for large families. Having seven children as a family is certainly questionable, but "the children must not suffer as a result." However, the FPÖ and ÖVP are probably only interested in "stepping on the weakest from above".