In the meantime, even the mainstream reported on the scandalous plans for an EU-wide compulsory renovation under the guise of “climate protection”. In Germany, too, sharp criticism of the project was promptly voiced. However, the EU Parliament was not deterred by this and voted in favor of tightening the utopian and anti-citizen guidelines. Is this about expropriations through the back door?
We reported on the EU directives in question for the first time in December: At that time, it was still said that new buildings had to be “emission-free” from 2030 and that residential buildings with the worst “Energy Performance Class” had to be renovated to at least Class F by 2030. That was a scandal in itself, because while the regulation of the construction sector will further exacerbate the housing shortage and skyrocketing rental prices, the forced renovations for owners of houses with poor energy efficiency are simply unmanageable.
In the EU, however, one does not act in favor of the citizens, but purely according to ideology. “For the sake of the climate” a tightening of the said guidelines was demanded (Report24 reported): New buildings must now be “emission-free” from 2028 and residential buildings must be renovated to class E instead of F by 2030. But that won’t be the end of it: by 2033, the worst energy performance class should be class D – and so on and so forth. Demands that could not be implemented before became even more utopian.
Despite massive criticism, the EU Parliament is sticking to these plans. The energy efficiency classes, which vary in the various member states, are to be harmonized across the EU in order to be able to enforce uniform refurbishments. “Exceptions should be possible for houses in which low-income people live,” it says – but they are silent about what these exceptions look like. The details are still to be discussed and clarified. The fact is that inflation is eating up the few remaining savings of the citizens – and even those who are considered to be higher earners cannot afford to make renovations of up to 100,000 euros.
Enforcement will be the responsibility of individual Member States. It can hardly be assumed that southern and eastern European countries, in which the average energy efficiency of buildings is often below that of Germany, will actually impose severe sanctions on large parts of their population. It will be countries like Germany that, as is so often the case, will act against their own citizens, driven by ideology: With the Greens in government – and it was Habeck in particular who expressly advocated tightening of EU regulations – it is not surprising that people fear expropriation. Excessive “consumption of space” by citizens who finance their own home or a larger apartment through hard work is known to be banned here. How convenient is it when these people cannot be contested for their insufficiently energy-efficient homes?
Harsh criticism of the EU directives comes from Markus Buchheit, MEP for the AfD and member of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy. He refers to the Basic Law and the immunity of the apartment:
“It is unbelievable that eco-fanatics and climate sectarians are allowed to dare such a deep encroachment on property and private rights. This process does not only affect homeowners. The tenants will also have to bear the costs. One can also look forward to thousands of legal proceedings that the tormented citizens will pursue. Because in Germany, the basic right from Art. 13 GG, which guarantees the immunity of the apartment, still applies. The individual has the right to a secure elementary living space in which one is left alone – even before planned economic regulatory interventions in the freedom of the individual.”
Unfortunately, the Corona crisis has shown impressively that the Basic Law is no longer a priority for politicians.