In the final sprint of the European Parliament election campaign, the FDP discovered a new theme. The Liberals displayed their lead candidate, Marie-Agnes Strack-Zimmermann, face-to-face with her CDU rival Ursula von der Leyen. „You have the choice", it said. It's about „EU growth" or "EU debt“, with the debt naturally attributed to the President of the Commission. Strack-Zimmermann promised in interviews that there will be no new joint debt with her party. Von der Leyen's openness to new EU debt is "extremely dangerous,“ she warned.

Already in their – rather thin – European election programme, the FDP warned against an „entry into a debt union" and at the same time demanded restraint in new sources of revenue for the EU budget. The original 750 billion euro Covid aid fund called "NextGenerationEU“ is supposed to be repaid in the coming years as planned, and remain an exception in EU history.

All this is fundamentally about the debate over which responsibilities should be located at EU level, and whether EU institutions should receive more money for new investment programmes, to support the green transformation of the economy, or for new geopolitical challenges. The FDP's position is supported in principle, among others, by the CDU/CSU. However, other parties see this fundamentally differently.

Chancellor Olaf Scholz had already celebrated the agreement on „NextGenerationEU" as the European "Hamilton moment“. One could argue that it a first step towards a European federal state. With regard to crisis instruments, the SPD election programme demanded continuous progress on integration. The Social Democrats particularly want to further develop the multibillion-dollar short-time work program SURE, which was also set up during the Covid crisis, into a permanent European unemployment insurance.

The Greens even see the Covid reconstruction fund as a model for effective joint EU financing of major investment projects. In their European election programme, they proposed an „infrastructure union" that could be financed from 2028 onwards. At the same time, the party wants to significantly increase the EU budget, financed by new own resources. Others are even more explicit: The Volt party, which already won a mandate in the European elections in 2019, wants to triple the next medium-term EU budget. Volt also wants a permanent inclusion of a reconstruction program in future budget negotiations – especially to strengthen the EU's strategic autonomy.

While Volt published by far the most extensive European programme with 147 pages, in which a lot of ambition for the further development of the EU can be seen (titled Dare Europe), the CDU/CSU relied more on the issue of security, promising security and prosperity. This also includes a reversal of many legislative initiatives in which they had participated in recent years. Under the key phrase overregulation, a reduction of the regulatory burden for the economy is promised. This means that the taxonomy and the Green Deal should be re-examined. According to the CDU/CSU, the ban on combustion engines should be repealed, as should the new supply chain law, and the new whistleblower rules.

Not surprisingly, the AfD („Rethinking Europe") is particularly critical of Brussels' previous climate policy. The Green Deal is completely rejected. The far right party's „Fit for 55“ proposal points to a dystopia of an „eco-socialist Brussels“ redistributive state moulded by regulations and directives. The AfD rejects any form of CO₂ pricing and any kind of EU taxes, wants to reduce the EU budget, and reintroduce national currencies.

EU trade policy has also generated controversial ideas. The CDU/CSU demand new free trade initiatives. New agreements should be concluded primarily with the US and South America, but without overburdening them with „extraneous issues", according to their programme. The FDP even explicitly demands a new attempt for a free trade agreement with the US, but also mentions Taiwan, Israel, as well as Arab and African countries for further, variously extensive agreements. The Liberals also warned against an "overload“ of the agreements with additional topics and obligations. Instead, these should be more strongly oriented towards geostrategic considerations.

It becomes clear very quickly that the Greens and Social Democrats see this somewhat differently. The SPD also speaks of a new orientation of European trade policy but emphasises that agreements that only aim at reducing tariffs and liberalising markets are no longer up to date. „The neoliberal dream that trade automatically leads to prosperity gains for everyone, political change, and more security in the world, is over", says the SPD.

In energy policy, CDU/CSU do not want to forego the option of nuclear power. Social Democrats and Greens consider this to be the wrong policy. The new Bündnis Sahra Wagenknecht (BSW) is difficult to pin down here – as with other topics as well. In energy policy, the BSW wants to resume oil and gas deliveries from Russia, abolish emissions trading, but also establish an EU hydrogen economy. Otherwise, the EU budget should not receive new own resources, and EU debt rules should be abolished.

Much in the EU programmes is predictable. But for those who read more closely, there are always ideas that stand out: The FDP wants a convention to draw up a federal constitution for the EU. Volt wants quality of life and well-being to be considered in the measurement of GDP in the future.