After the failure of discussions between the federal government and the states on mandatory flood insurance, the debate about better protection against natural risks continues.
On Thursday, the federal government and the chief ministers of the 16 states failed to agree on even a minimal compromise, with state leaders insisting on mandatory insurance. “We regret that the federal government and the states were not able to agree on a solution that would allow more people to insure their property against the risks associated with extreme weather conditions,” Jörg Asmussen, CEO of the GDV insurance companies, said on Friday in Berlin. association. The obligation to offer all owners outlined by the Ministry of Justice would have been “an acceptable compromise” from the sector’s point of view.
Federal Environment Minister Steffi Lemke (The Greens) also insisted that a solution must be found quickly: “It is crucial to quickly find a solidarity solution that does not burden tenants and owners financially.” But it is precisely in regions that are threatened by floods that risk-adjusted premiums can amount to four-figure sums – or expensive protection measures for basements and houses. This could only be compensated with state subsidies. By increasing insurance coverage, the politicians will avoid that in the event of a flood, the State is automatically called upon to financially help those affected.
Ms Lemke explained that with the Act on Adaptation to Climate Change, which comes into force on 1 July, the consequences of climate change must still be taken into account in planning. The Ministry of the Environment is also working with the federal states to improve the law on flood protection. The states could also decide on mandatory insurance against natural risks such as floods, heavy rain and snow on their own, but none of the 16 states has yet taken the lead. So far there are only a few compulsory insurances in Germany: for car owners, for dog owners, for hunters and one for professions such as doctors, pharmacists or architects.
Hesse’s Prime Minister Boris Rhein (CDU) once again rejected Federal Justice Minister Marco Buschmann’s proposal after his meeting with Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD). “Voluntary work does not solve the problem We still believe that compulsory insurance is the right solution.” According to him, the insurance rate, which is currently 54 percent according to industry data, only increases by one to two percent a year despite disasters like the one in the Ahr Valley. “It’s too little and it’s definitely too slow,” Rhein said. It must now be discussed again at working level. “We don’t want to delay anything,” Scholz said.
Buschmann had again argued for the obligation to offer before the prime ministers: for new contracts, the companies had to include natural risks such as floods and snow pressure in the insurance policy, but the customers could refuse protection. For existing contracts, owners must be expressly informed that they do not have this cover. The insurance companies believe that this will increase the degree of coverage to 75-80%.
The parliamentary director of the SPD group in the Bundestag, Johannes Fechner, reiterated his support for France’s semi-public model of covering natural disasters during a meeting with consumer advocates. “In Germany we don’t have to reinvent the wheel on difficult issues, and in France we have a system that works and allows citizens to insure themselves against natural damage at a lower price,” he said of the European Consumer Center (ZEV) in Kehl. He has little understanding of the Minister of Justice’s opposition. But the insurance companies also believe that the French solution is impractical. Additionally, it provides little incentive to protect your own home from natural hazards.
(Reporting by Alexander Hübner, written by Jörn Poltz; for questions, please contact our editorial staff at berlin.newsroom@thomsonreuters.com (for politics and economics) or frankfurt.newsroom@thomsonreuters.com (for Business and markets )).
