The reason is an inquiry by Gewessler about her approval of the EU renaturation regulation, which has been widely criticized by the ÖVP. The minister would “do well to resign immediately before she is voted out by the voters,” Gerstl, who submitted the inquiry, told the “Kurier” newspaper. Green justice spokeswoman Agnes Prammer came to the defense.
Gerstl also described Gewessler as a “threat to the state”. In mid-June, she voted for the regulation in the Council of EU states against the will of her coalition partner, the ÖVP, which was then adopted by a narrow majority. The People’s Party subsequently filed a complaint against the Green minister for abuse of office because she had not reached agreement with the federal states and the ÖVP-led Ministry of Agriculture. The complaint is being examined by the Economic and Corruption Prosecutor’s Office (WKStA). The ÖVP did not support a motion of no confidence against Gewessler by the FPÖ in July.
‘,’pinpoll-274242’, null, null, ‘C0004’);
});
Gewessler is breaking federalism and refusing to recognize the unified position of the federal states – “knowing that this could only have been overturned by a new unified position,” said Gerstl, who accused the minister of shifting responsibility to Vienna. The fact that she spoke out in favor of the renaturation ordinance despite a negative position from the states is justified in the response to the inquiry, which APA has seen, namely by Vienna’s decision to opt out. The capital had supported the renaturation after changing course. “If there is no longer a unified position among the states, there is no longer a unified position among the states,” it says. In addition, there is “no obligation to reach agreement with the Ministry of Agriculture with regard to the final voting behavior in the EU Council.”
“The minister acted irresponsibly and broke the law,” was Gerstl’s conclusion. The ÖVP refers to the legal opinion of the Constitutional Service of the Federal Chancellery. However, Gewessler’s response to the inquiry states that the latter “solved the legal question incorrectly.” In addition, the Constitutional Service’s legal opinion is not intended to be binding.
“A climate protection minister who votes for nature is doing her job and nothing else,” said Green Party justice spokeswoman Agnes Prammer, defending Gewessler’s actions. She considers it negligent to call her a “threat to the state”: “Real threats are being massively trivialized here.” The ÖVP has become accustomed to “serving the interests of a few lobby groups. That is why it is incomprehensible to her that, when there are different legal views, they do not cling to the one that changes the status quo as little as possible, but instead courageously make the decision to protect nature and people,” she said, attacking the coalition partner.
