Post sponsored by

MIL OSI Translation. Region: Germany / Deutschland –

Source: CDU CSU

Dear Madam President! Dear colleagues! We have discussed insolvency law very often at this point in the last few weeks and months. Of course, everything was always under the heading of the corona pandemic. In insolvency law in particular, we have always given intensive thought to how we can use insolvency law instruments to protect entrepreneurs from the effects of the pandemic.

I would also like to say at this point: Mr. Jacobi, if the AfD speaker is not there at the agreed time for the debate, then that gives a deep insight into the AfD’s self-image on this important topic.

(Stephan Brandner [AfD]: Sneak!)

If you then, Madam President, demonstrate such a great understanding of democracy – which I believe is exemplary for this House – and let Mr Jacobi do the talking, then I believe that on such a day it will be a good thing Exemplary example of how democrats deal with each other. In the end, the only question that remains is whether the AfD would do the same in reverse.

(Applause from the CDU / CSU, the SPD, the LEFT and the BÜNDNIS 90 / DIE GRÜNEN as well as from members of the FDP – Steffi Lemke [BÜNDNIS 90 / DIE GRÜNEN]: That’s no question! Wouldn’t you!)

In the debates that we have had here about bankruptcy law, various points have come up over and over again. There were of course the indications that there are various other fields of action in insolvency law. We in the government factions have also seen it that way at some points. Of course, it has always been pointed out that the suspension of the reasons for insolvency should not lead to the fact that we ultimately just postpone a wave of bankruptcies and then at some point there will be a major impact. It is certainly true that the draft we are discussing here today has been in the pipeline for a long time. But the draft provides exemplary answers precisely to these problems.

On the one hand, the objective is that the law should come into force on January 1, 2021. That is not undisputed. There are also those who see it critically. But of course this is also intended to send the signal that we want to give companies affected by Covid-19 – who are not insolvent, but over-indebted – the opportunity to fall within the scope of this new law, and possibly already to be able to use the new instrument, about which I will say something later.

Our goal is: We don’t want a wave of bankruptcies. The idea is that we stand by the entrepreneurs in the country over the months. I think that’s what motivates us across the political groups here.

(Applause from Deputy Dr. Heribert Hirte [CDU / CSU])

The core of this draft is primarily the changes in the StaRUG – Professor Hirte outlined it earlier – in the Company Stabilization and Restructuring Act. There we come to a very important instrument, namely preventive restructuring measures.

I want to take the opportunity to explain to you why this is so important and why this approach is so right. In the run-up to insolvency proceedings, there is now the option of carrying out restructuring measures against the will of individual participants. So far it has been the case that only out-of-court restructuring is actually possible before the insolvency proceedings, and this requires unanimity. In insolvency proceedings there is then the possibility of a majority decision; but then you are already in bankruptcy proceedings.

That is why we are putting something on the rails with this new instrument that practice has longed for and which is of course also the subject of the EU directive that we are implementing at this point. The whole thing opens up more flexibility, which should go so far that the restructuring measure can also be carried out by the managing director in individual cases and one does not have to appoint an insolvency administrator. We believe this is a step in the right direction.

It will be the case that we will certainly still have to deal with individual issues in the parliamentary procedure. The Greens raised such a question in their application, namely whether the procedural rules are not so complicated that small companies and, for example, start-ups may not even benefit from these innovations. We have to look at that.

We from the Free State of Bavaria, or at least the Bavarian State Government, still has a bit of a stomachache because they see Article 2 as an interference with state competence; we’ll have to talk about that. I am looking forward.

Thank you for your attention.

(Applause from the CDU / CSU)


EDITOR’S NOTE: This article is a translation. Apologies should the grammar and / or sentence structure not be perfect.

MIL Translation OSI