(de-news.net) – Family Minister Karin Prien (CDU) has defended plans to overhaul the program ‘Demokratie leben’ by shifting focus toward the societal center, strengthening evaluation, and prioritizing efficiency, while critics warn that the changes could threaten civil society organizations reliant on federal funding.
In response to sustained criticism from civil society actors, the Federal Family Minister defended the planned restructuring of the federal program ‘Demokratie leben’, arguing that a broader erosion of public trust necessitates a recalibration of existing policy instruments and strategic priorities. From Prien’s perspective, the reform is intended not merely as an administrative adjustment but as a substantive response to shifting societal dynamics, with the program expected to foster greater pluralism, enhance transparency, and reinforce democratic legitimacy. At the same time, she indicated that outreach efforts should more effectively target individuals perceived to be at risk of drifting away from the democratic mainstream, thereby stabilizing cohesion within the societal ‘center.’ In this context, future funding priorities are to be realigned accordingly, accompanied by an expansion of civic education initiatives across early childhood institutions, general and vocational schools, workplaces, and trade unions, as well as by a more pronounced focus on digital and online environments as key arenas of democratic engagement. Concurrently, Prien has proposed discontinuing the explicit designation of diversity promotion as a primary state funding objective, maintaining that while diversity remains inherently valuable, it should not constitute the central criterion guiding the allocation of public resources.
Criticism directed at these proposed changes has been firmly rejected by other CDU leaders, where the reform is framed as a necessary step toward improving accountability and effectiveness. Thus, Anja Weisgerber emphasized that the minister was implementing a core political commitment by introducing more rigorous evaluation standards, while characterizing objections to the reform as largely unfounded. Under the revised framework, project applicants would be required to substantiate measurable contributions to social cohesion and to provide greater transparency regarding the ultimate recipients of funding, measures intended to ensure that public resources are deployed in a targeted, efficient, and verifiable manner. In addition, proponents have underscored that the restructured program is designed to broaden its societal reach, generate more tangible impact, and strengthen efforts to counter extremist tendencies. Prien had previously outlined that the overhaul aims to enhance the efficiency of approximately 191 million euros in annual funding; nevertheless, resistance has emerged not only from opposition parties but also from segments of the governing coalition, including representatives of the SPD, reflecting ongoing political contestation over the program’s future orientation.
Greens raise alarm over uncertainty
Concerns have been articulated with particular urgency by Marlene Schönberger (Greens), who warned that the cumulative effect of recent announcements has been widely interpreted among civil society organizations as posing a potentially existential threat to their continued operation. According to her assessment, numerous groups engaged in combating antisemitism and Islamist extremism are facing acute uncertainty regarding their financial viability, with some reportedly refraining from public communication out of concern that increased visibility could adversely affect their funding prospects. She further argued that many of these organizations are structurally dependent on federal support and have already been operating under significant strain in light of rising antisemitism, leaving them particularly vulnerable to policy shifts. In this light, any substantial reduction or withdrawal of funding could precipitate the closure of established initiatives and undermine networks that have developed over many years, consolidating expertise and providing stability for affected communities. The potential erosion of such support structures, she suggested, would have especially severe consequences for vulnerable populations, while raising the broader risk that individuals targeted by extremist actors could be left without adequate institutional backing.
Audio: TTSFree
