Your contact for new licenses
Today, the heads of state and government are discussing Europe’s competitiveness at the informal summit in Budapest. They will adopt a “Budapest Declaration” in which they set ambitious economic policy goals for the Commission and themselves. As is so often the case, they remain vague about the means of achieving these goals – especially when it comes to money.
Funding is a divisive factor that not only works at the European level. It can also finish off national governments, as we have been experiencing since Wednesday. However, with the end of the traffic light coalition in Germany, the discussions about financial leeway are far from over: Former Minister Christian Lindner has decisively shaped the EU debt rules according to his own ideas. In the EU Commission’s interpretation, the new rules for Germany’s medium-term financial plan require more savings or reform and investment efforts than the traffic light coalition was prepared to make.
The German financial plan should have been in Brussels in October, but Berlin missed the deadline. With the coalition’s collapse, it is clear that the plan will not come this month either. Together with France, Germany is now one of the few countries that is already behind schedule in the first step of the new process to comply with the debt rules.
However, the end of the traffic light coalition could also have positive aspects from a European perspective. For example, the discussion about the EU‘s new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) can be tackled next year with a new government. This means that the process could not be delayed until the end of 2025, as feared.
Take a well-deserved rest this weekend from the political events of the past few days!
Donald Trump was the elephant in the room, Olaf Scholz the big absentee. The turbulent situation in Berlin prevented the German Chancellor from traveling to the meeting of the European Political Community (EPC) in Budapest. 42 heads of state and government gathered in a soccer stadium on the outskirts of the Hungarian capital on Thursday.
Almost everyone had a comment on the end of the coalition in Berlin: Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, for example, hopes for a quick new election in Germany. A strong and united German government
is needed in Europe. Germany is an extremely important country in European cooperation, emphasized Sweden’s Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson. He hoped for a German solution as soon as possible. His Danish counterpart Mette Frederiksen expressed a similar view: A strong Germany is needed to build a strong Europe.
Behind the scenes, however, there are also voices that can see a positive side to the premature end of the government in Berlin. The coalition had already been unable to act in Brussels for months. An earlier election date would also be advantageous with regard to the discussions on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), as there would then be no need to wait until September or longer for Berlin.
The biannual EPG summits are a high-level discussion format that was once launched by French President Emmanuel Macron. This time, Hungary’s head of government, of all people, was the host. However, Viktor Orbán can also be diplomatic in the large group and avoided provocation. Europe could not wait for the Americans to protect it, he said. After Trump’s return to the White House, Europe would have to talk about its security structure. Perhaps Orbán’s reticence has something to do with the fact that, according to a study by the EU Commission, Hungary would be particularly hard hit by Trump’s threat of new tariffs.
He called Donald Trump after the election victory and had a “good, productive conversation”, said Volodymyr Zelenskiy. “We hope that America will become stronger.” This is the America that Europe needs. Because Vladimir Putin has upped the ante: “North Korean soldiers are about to kill our people on European soil”, said Zelenskiy.
Pressuring his country to make concessions to Russia in this situation would be unacceptable for Ukraine and “suicidal” for Europe, he warned, presumably also referring to his host Orbán. It was an illusion to believe that peace could be bought with concessions. Peace is the reward for those who are strong. Donald Trump should also like that.
Emmanuel Macron also had clear words: It is logical that Donald Trump represents the interests of the USA. The real question is whether the Europeans are prepared to defend their own interests. The French President painted a bleak picture of the world. Europeans could no longer remain “vegetarians” in a world dominated by “carnivores”.
They would at least have to become “omnivores” in order to survive. Macron is likely to try to reinvent himself in the shadow of Trump’s comeback and take on the role of spokesman for Europe.
Olaf Scholz will not miss the informal EU summit today. The Federal Chancellor wanted to arrive on Thursday evening. Viktor Orbán had invited the EU heads of state and government to a dinner at which Trump’s comeback and transatlantic relations were also to be discussed.
Wopke Hoekstra greeted the members of the three committees on Thursday with a broad smile and expansive voice. The mood in the room seemed relaxed right from the start. The environmental, industrial and economic politicians (ENVI, ITRE, ECON) of the EU Parliament did not put any major obstacles in the way of the designated Climate Commissioner during his hearing.
However, the vote of the coordinators was then somewhat jerky, but this was not due to Hoekstra but to the designated Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos. The EPP wanted to reject Kos after her hearing, whereupon Renew refused to give Hoekstra the green light. In the end, both – Climate Commissioner Hoekstra and Enlargement Commissioner Kos – were accepted. EPP, S&D, Renew, Greens and ECR voted in favor of Hoekstra. The Left, PfE and ESN voted against him.
Even before the hearing, a Green MEP described the general image of the Dutchman: “Everyone loves Hoekstra.” However, this did not stop the MEPs from making some promises to the former Dutch finance and foreign minister. Hoekstra announced the following:
In particular, the future of the automotive industry was the focus of many of the MEPs’ questions. Hoekstra made no secret of the fact that he believes e-fuels are better suited to other industrial sectors than road transport, such as air and sea transport.
Was he planning to suspend fines for car manufacturers that do not comply with their CO2 fleet limits? Although he did not answer yes or no, he recalled 2020 and 2021, when car manufacturers also complained about fines, but in the end only one company paid a negligible amount.
Hoekstra said that he would work together with the industry for better competitiveness, less bureaucracy and a clear path for more investment. With regard to reducing bureaucracy, he announced his intention to work towards simpler rules, for example with regard to reporting obligations. At the same time, he made it clear that he would not shake up the decarbonization targets.
He also expressed support for proposals for the decarbonization of company cars, social leasing offers for EVs and the inclusion of negative emissions in European emissions trading. He also expressed his willingness to encourage member states to use their ETS revenues to mitigate the impact of climate measures on the population.
There are high expectations of the old and new commissioner for international climate negotiations when it comes to the question of how Europe intends to convince the rest of the world to do more to protect the climate. China and the USA in particular must increase their efforts for more climate protection, Hoekstra demanded. This could be achieved with instruments such as CBAM, a little pressure, and climate diplomacy. After all, Europe is only responsible for six percent of global CO2 emissions, and now we need to ensure that the other 94 percent is also tackled.
Green MEP Michael Bloss was not satisfied with the answer. “Hoekstra can no longer hide behind China and the USA.” This applies in particular to the new climate financing target to be negotiated at COP29 in Baku next week. If Europe claims the leadership role, money must also be put on the table, said Bloss. Standing still was no longer an option.
The future budget Commissioner was economical – at least with his time. While other Commissioners-designate usually used the two-minute time allotted to them in the hearings right up to the last second, Piotr Serafin was often finished after just one minute. This did not seem to bother the MEPs: The coordinators of the Committee on Budgets (BUDG) and the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) confirmed Serafin for the post that the Commission President had intended for him.
His good reputation as a former Permanent Representative of Poland and former Chief of Staff to Donald Tusk certainly helped him. “It was clear to me even before the hearing that Serafin was the most suitable of the 26 Commissioners-designate for the budget dossier”, said Siegfried Mureşan (EPP), rapporteur for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), to Table.Briefings.
In his brief answers, Serafin avoided committing himself to specific projects. Nevertheless, his priorities became clear:
MEPs from several political groups expressed fears that tying EU funds more closely to national reforms would result in member states losing influence. The Commission could use the additional political power arbitrarily against EU member states, they feared. Serafin assured MEPs that the aim was not to push through the Commission’s ideas, but to pursue common EU priorities.
Criticism came mainly from the far-right during the hearing. The PfE parliamentary group, which includes Orbán’s Fidesz party, complained about the EU’s rule of law mechanism. However, Serafin unreservedly backed the mechanism.
He was already Commissioner for the Euro and Social Dialogue (2014 to 2019), then Commissioner for Trade (since 2019). In his next mandate, Valdis Dombrovskis will be responsible for the Economy, Productivity, Implementation and Simplification portfolios. The 53-year-old, who is part of the Christian Democrat EPP party family, was heard by the Economic Affairs and Legal Affairs Committees. The Budget (BUDG), Constitution (AFCO), Employment (EMPL), Internal Market (IMCO) and Taxation (FISC) committees were also invited.
Dombrovskis was confirmed by the coordinators in the evening. He received the votes of the EPP, S&D, Renew, Greens and ECR. The two radical right-wing groups and the Left voted against him.
The Latvian cut a confident figure. He has known the issues in depth for years, so it was no real challenge for him to present the Commission’s plans for the next mandate. In his 15-minute introduction, he spoke in his native Latvian. In conversation with the MEPs, he switched to English.
The Commission’s mandate is based on the motto of strengthening competitiveness, said Dombrovskis. He outlined the central challenges:
In four rounds of questions, moderated by the chairs of the committees, Aurore Lalucq (ECON) and Ilhan Kyuchyuk (JURI), MEPs had their say. ECON Coordinator of the EPP, Markus Ferber, wanted to know whether the candidate could guarantee equal treatment of all member states in the course of monitoring national budgets. In addition, he asked whether the consistent monitoring would not suffer with frequent changes of government, such as in Germany.
The candidate made it clear that the new rules would of course apply equally to all member states. He added that everyone involved knew when the new fiscal rules were introduced that there would be very tight timetables. He conceded that the formation of governments out of turn delayed the submission of plans to the Commission.
Irene Tinagli (S&D), member of the economic committee, said: “In addition to public funds, private capital is needed to make the necessary investments.” Dombrovskis agreed: “Additional capital, both private and public, must be mobilized.” Leverage instruments could also be considered, such as the Juncker Fund.
He did not specify where the additional EU funds should come from. New own resources and higher contributions from the member states are conceivable. This is what the proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) will be about. The Commission wants to present it in 2025. The Commission will make its first concrete proposals for reducing bureaucracy when it presents its new work program.
A Green MEP wanted to know whether the Commission was making proposals to the member states as part of the European Semester to reduce subsidies on fossil fuels. Dombrovskis: “The Commission has already done this in the past with deadlines.” He also plans to do this in the future as part of the country-specific recommendations.
Donald Trump will be the 47th President of the United States of America. In terms of economic, climate and foreign policy, he is out for maximum confrontation: The likely topics of conflict include tariffs, trade surpluses, dealing with China, support for Ukraine, fossil fuels, and the European Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) – to name just a few examples. “The EU is taking advantage of us”, says Trump. Or: “Europe doesn’t buy our cars.”
The paradox: Despite these conflicts, European governments will try to move closer to the USA in the coming years. Trump brings chaos – and people seek security in chaos. This can already be seen in the currency markets, where the US dollar rose sharply on election night.
There is a great risk that this will be at the expense of European cohesion. Trump will try to weaken the EU institutions. They represent precisely the rule-based, multilateral world that he wants to tear down.
But European governments will also be tempted to negotiate with Trump behind Brussels’ back. Poland and the Baltic states have existential security concerns against which only the USA can reliably protect them for the foreseeable future. Italy and Hungary are led by parties that are ideologically close to Trump. Germany needs energy and growth. At the moment, we only get both – if at all – from the USA.
There will therefore be a great temptation to forge bilateral deals with President Trump; there is a great danger of being split up in the process and being determined by others. An abstract hope for European cohesion will not be enough to resist this. To avert this risk, we must recognize the dark gravity that will emanate from the White House over the next four years. And then negotiate within Europe how we can defy this gravity and prioritize our common interests.
The core of intra-European horse-trading – and that is all we need – could be an agreement in the Weimar Triangle. France could agree to a market-oriented reform and a deepening agenda for the internal market. Poland could agree to focus more on European armaments cooperation. Germany could invest money in European security and energy infrastructure in order to relieve the burden on the networks of its neighboring countries and balance its trade.
The respective concessions would make sense in themselves and would be popular in other countries. They would give weak governments a purpose and thus new life.
If Europe wants to continue to trade with the world, it must become more independent of the United States. This requires governments to invest courageously, both individually and together. Financially and politically, this is possible if Germany lives up to its central role in Europe – and if German fiscal policy is prepared to take on this task. If we freeze idolatrously in front of the current debt brake, there is a great risk that Trump will divide Europe. Our export model would be under existential threat – as would the sustainability of our public finances.
Max Krahé is a political theorist and economist. He researches the history of ideas, the division of labor, and the relationship between democracy and capitalism. is co-founder and research director of Dezernat Zukunft.
Today, the heads of state and government are discussing Europe’s competitiveness at the informal summit in Budapest. They will adopt a “Budapest Declaration” in which they set ambitious economic policy goals for the Commission and themselves. As is so often the case, they remain vague about the means of achieving these goals – especially when it comes to money.
Funding is a divisive factor that not only works at the European level. It can also finish off national governments, as we have been experiencing since Wednesday. However, with the end of the traffic light coalition in Germany, the discussions about financial leeway are far from over: Former Minister Christian Lindner has decisively shaped the EU debt rules according to his own ideas. In the EU Commission’s interpretation, the new rules for Germany’s medium-term financial plan require more savings or reform and investment efforts than the traffic light coalition was prepared to make.
The German financial plan should have been in Brussels in October, but Berlin missed the deadline. With the coalition’s collapse, it is clear that the plan will not come this month either. Together with France, Germany is now one of the few countries that is already behind schedule in the first step of the new process to comply with the debt rules.
However, the end of the traffic light coalition could also have positive aspects from a European perspective. For example, the discussion about the EU‘s new Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) can be tackled next year with a new government. This means that the process could not be delayed until the end of 2025, as feared.
Take a well-deserved rest this weekend from the political events of the past few days!
Donald Trump was the elephant in the room, Olaf Scholz the big absentee. The turbulent situation in Berlin prevented the German Chancellor from traveling to the meeting of the European Political Community (EPC) in Budapest. 42 heads of state and government gathered in a soccer stadium on the outskirts of the Hungarian capital on Thursday.
Almost everyone had a comment on the end of the coalition in Berlin: Finnish Prime Minister Petteri Orpo, for example, hopes for a quick new election in Germany. A strong and united German government
is needed in Europe. Germany is an extremely important country in European cooperation, emphasized Sweden’s Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson. He hoped for a German solution as soon as possible. His Danish counterpart Mette Frederiksen expressed a similar view: A strong Germany is needed to build a strong Europe.
Behind the scenes, however, there are also voices that can see a positive side to the premature end of the government in Berlin. The coalition had already been unable to act in Brussels for months. An earlier election date would also be advantageous with regard to the discussions on the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), as there would then be no need to wait until September or longer for Berlin.
The biannual EPG summits are a high-level discussion format that was once launched by French President Emmanuel Macron. This time, Hungary’s head of government, of all people, was the host. However, Viktor Orbán can also be diplomatic in the large group and avoided provocation. Europe could not wait for the Americans to protect it, he said. After Trump’s return to the White House, Europe would have to talk about its security structure. Perhaps Orbán’s reticence has something to do with the fact that, according to a study by the EU Commission, Hungary would be particularly hard hit by Trump’s threat of new tariffs.
He called Donald Trump after the election victory and had a “good, productive conversation”, said Volodymyr Zelenskiy. “We hope that America will become stronger.” This is the America that Europe needs. Because Vladimir Putin has upped the ante: “North Korean soldiers are about to kill our people on European soil”, said Zelenskiy.
Pressuring his country to make concessions to Russia in this situation would be unacceptable for Ukraine and “suicidal” for Europe, he warned, presumably also referring to his host Orbán. It was an illusion to believe that peace could be bought with concessions. Peace is the reward for those who are strong. Donald Trump should also like that.
Emmanuel Macron also had clear words: It is logical that Donald Trump represents the interests of the USA. The real question is whether the Europeans are prepared to defend their own interests. The French President painted a bleak picture of the world. Europeans could no longer remain “vegetarians” in a world dominated by “carnivores”.
They would at least have to become “omnivores” in order to survive. Macron is likely to try to reinvent himself in the shadow of Trump’s comeback and take on the role of spokesman for Europe.
Olaf Scholz will not miss the informal EU summit today. The Federal Chancellor wanted to arrive on Thursday evening. Viktor Orbán had invited the EU heads of state and government to a dinner at which Trump’s comeback and transatlantic relations were also to be discussed.
Wopke Hoekstra greeted the members of the three committees on Thursday with a broad smile and expansive voice. The mood in the room seemed relaxed right from the start. The environmental, industrial and economic politicians (ENVI, ITRE, ECON) of the EU Parliament did not put any major obstacles in the way of the designated Climate Commissioner during his hearing.
However, the vote of the coordinators was then somewhat jerky, but this was not due to Hoekstra but to the designated Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos. The EPP wanted to reject Kos after her hearing, whereupon Renew refused to give Hoekstra the green light. In the end, both – Climate Commissioner Hoekstra and Enlargement Commissioner Kos – were accepted. EPP, S&D, Renew, Greens and ECR voted in favor of Hoekstra. The Left, PfE and ESN voted against him.
Even before the hearing, a Green MEP described the general image of the Dutchman: “Everyone loves Hoekstra.” However, this did not stop the MEPs from making some promises to the former Dutch finance and foreign minister. Hoekstra announced the following:
In particular, the future of the automotive industry was the focus of many of the MEPs’ questions. Hoekstra made no secret of the fact that he believes e-fuels are better suited to other industrial sectors than road transport, such as air and sea transport.
Was he planning to suspend fines for car manufacturers that do not comply with their CO2 fleet limits? Although he did not answer yes or no, he recalled 2020 and 2021, when car manufacturers also complained about fines, but in the end only one company paid a negligible amount.
Hoekstra said that he would work together with the industry for better competitiveness, less bureaucracy and a clear path for more investment. With regard to reducing bureaucracy, he announced his intention to work towards simpler rules, for example with regard to reporting obligations. At the same time, he made it clear that he would not shake up the decarbonization targets.
He also expressed support for proposals for the decarbonization of company cars, social leasing offers for EVs and the inclusion of negative emissions in European emissions trading. He also expressed his willingness to encourage member states to use their ETS revenues to mitigate the impact of climate measures on the population.
There are high expectations of the old and new commissioner for international climate negotiations when it comes to the question of how Europe intends to convince the rest of the world to do more to protect the climate. China and the USA in particular must increase their efforts for more climate protection, Hoekstra demanded. This could be achieved with instruments such as CBAM, a little pressure, and climate diplomacy. After all, Europe is only responsible for six percent of global CO2 emissions, and now we need to ensure that the other 94 percent is also tackled.
Green MEP Michael Bloss was not satisfied with the answer. “Hoekstra can no longer hide behind China and the USA.” This applies in particular to the new climate financing target to be negotiated at COP29 in Baku next week. If Europe claims the leadership role, money must also be put on the table, said Bloss. Standing still was no longer an option.
The future budget Commissioner was economical – at least with his time. While other Commissioners-designate usually used the two-minute time allotted to them in the hearings right up to the last second, Piotr Serafin was often finished after just one minute. This did not seem to bother the MEPs: The coordinators of the Committee on Budgets (BUDG) and the Committee on Budgetary Control (CONT) confirmed Serafin for the post that the Commission President had intended for him.
His good reputation as a former Permanent Representative of Poland and former Chief of Staff to Donald Tusk certainly helped him. “It was clear to me even before the hearing that Serafin was the most suitable of the 26 Commissioners-designate for the budget dossier”, said Siegfried Mureşan (EPP), rapporteur for the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF), to Table.Briefings.
In his brief answers, Serafin avoided committing himself to specific projects. Nevertheless, his priorities became clear:
MEPs from several political groups expressed fears that tying EU funds more closely to national reforms would result in member states losing influence. The Commission could use the additional political power arbitrarily against EU member states, they feared. Serafin assured MEPs that the aim was not to push through the Commission’s ideas, but to pursue common EU priorities.
Criticism came mainly from the far-right during the hearing. The PfE parliamentary group, which includes Orbán’s Fidesz party, complained about the EU’s rule of law mechanism. However, Serafin unreservedly backed the mechanism.
He was already Commissioner for the Euro and Social Dialogue (2014 to 2019), then Commissioner for Trade (since 2019). In his next mandate, Valdis Dombrovskis will be responsible for the Economy, Productivity, Implementation and Simplification portfolios. The 53-year-old, who is part of the Christian Democrat EPP party family, was heard by the Economic Affairs and Legal Affairs Committees. The Budget (BUDG), Constitution (AFCO), Employment (EMPL), Internal Market (IMCO) and Taxation (FISC) committees were also invited.
Dombrovskis was confirmed by the coordinators in the evening. He received the votes of the EPP, S&D, Renew, Greens and ECR. The two radical right-wing groups and the Left voted against him.
The Latvian cut a confident figure. He has known the issues in depth for years, so it was no real challenge for him to present the Commission’s plans for the next mandate. In his 15-minute introduction, he spoke in his native Latvian. In conversation with the MEPs, he switched to English.
The Commission’s mandate is based on the motto of strengthening competitiveness, said Dombrovskis. He outlined the central challenges:
In four rounds of questions, moderated by the chairs of the committees, Aurore Lalucq (ECON) and Ilhan Kyuchyuk (JURI), MEPs had their say. ECON Coordinator of the EPP, Markus Ferber, wanted to know whether the candidate could guarantee equal treatment of all member states in the course of monitoring national budgets. In addition, he asked whether the consistent monitoring would not suffer with frequent changes of government, such as in Germany.
The candidate made it clear that the new rules would of course apply equally to all member states. He added that everyone involved knew when the new fiscal rules were introduced that there would be very tight timetables. He conceded that the formation of governments out of turn delayed the submission of plans to the Commission.
Irene Tinagli (S&D), member of the economic committee, said: “In addition to public funds, private capital is needed to make the necessary investments.” Dombrovskis agreed: “Additional capital, both private and public, must be mobilized.” Leverage instruments could also be considered, such as the Juncker Fund.
He did not specify where the additional EU funds should come from. New own resources and higher contributions from the member states are conceivable. This is what the proposal for the next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) will be about. The Commission wants to present it in 2025. The Commission will make its first concrete proposals for reducing bureaucracy when it presents its new work program.
A Green MEP wanted to know whether the Commission was making proposals to the member states as part of the European Semester to reduce subsidies on fossil fuels. Dombrovskis: “The Commission has already done this in the past with deadlines.” He also plans to do this in the future as part of the country-specific recommendations.
Donald Trump will be the 47th President of the United States of America. In terms of economic, climate and foreign policy, he is out for maximum confrontation: The likely topics of conflict include tariffs, trade surpluses, dealing with China, support for Ukraine, fossil fuels, and the European Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) – to name just a few examples. “The EU is taking advantage of us”, says Trump. Or: “Europe doesn’t buy our cars.”
The paradox: Despite these conflicts, European governments will try to move closer to the USA in the coming years. Trump brings chaos – and people seek security in chaos. This can already be seen in the currency markets, where the US dollar rose sharply on election night.
There is a great risk that this will be at the expense of European cohesion. Trump will try to weaken the EU institutions. They represent precisely the rule-based, multilateral world that he wants to tear down.
But European governments will also be tempted to negotiate with Trump behind Brussels’ back. Poland and the Baltic states have existential security concerns against which only the USA can reliably protect them for the foreseeable future. Italy and Hungary are led by parties that are ideologically close to Trump. Germany needs energy and growth. At the moment, we only get both – if at all – from the USA.
There will therefore be a great temptation to forge bilateral deals with President Trump; there is a great danger of being split up in the process and being determined by others. An abstract hope for European cohesion will not be enough to resist this. To avert this risk, we must recognize the dark gravity that will emanate from the White House over the next four years. And then negotiate within Europe how we can defy this gravity and prioritize our common interests.
The core of intra-European horse-trading – and that is all we need – could be an agreement in the Weimar Triangle. France could agree to a market-oriented reform and a deepening agenda for the internal market. Poland could agree to focus more on European armaments cooperation. Germany could invest money in European security and energy infrastructure in order to relieve the burden on the networks of its neighboring countries and balance its trade.
The respective concessions would make sense in themselves and would be popular in other countries. They would give weak governments a purpose and thus new life.
If Europe wants to continue to trade with the world, it must become more independent of the United States. This requires governments to invest courageously, both individually and together. Financially and politically, this is possible if Germany lives up to its central role in Europe – and if German fiscal policy is prepared to take on this task. If we freeze idolatrously in front of the current debt brake, there is a great risk that Trump will divide Europe. Our export model would be under existential threat – as would the sustainability of our public finances.
Max Krahé is a political theorist and economist. He researches the history of ideas, the division of labor, and the relationship between democracy and capitalism. is co-founder and research director of Dezernat Zukunft.