Let’s be more confident about digital technology

There is no doubt that the legislative and executive branches still have some catching up to do in almost all areas if they are to streamline public administration and offer end-to-end, fully digitalised services for businesses, citizens and, ultimately, for themselves and Germany as a business location. After 23 February 2025, the new federal government will face long-overdue tasks relating to the modernisation of the state, the reduction of bureaucracy and the comprehensive digitalisation of public administration. This is also because external pressure and expectations regarding the (digital) capabilities of a state such as Germany are (rightly) on the rise. 

Spotlight I: For eight out of ten businesses, the lack of, or inadequate, digitalisation of public administration is an economic disadvantage for the country as a business location. Nine out of ten businesses even see it as a stumbling block to the digitalisation of their own organisations (both figures from the 2023 Bitkom business survey). 

Highlight II: According to the ifo Institute, a digitalisation push in Germany to the level seen in Denmark could increase per capita GDP by 2.7 per cent, which corresponds to an annual economic output of approximately 96 billion euros (see ifo Institute, ‘Costs of Bureaucracy’, 2024). 

Highlight III: Just over 50 per cent of citizens rate the general level of digitalisation in their town or local authority as advanced (see Bitkom study ‘Digitalisation of Public Administration’, 2024). 

In an increasingly polarised society, disillusionment with politics and a sceptical attitude towards representative, parliamentary democracy are manifesting themselves in rising vote shares for populist ‘blockade’ parties, which are less concerned with viable solutions and achievements based on social consensus than with a fundamental change to the system. Circumstances of fragile governing majorities and unstable coalition alliances – hitherto relatively unknown in Germany – are becoming the new political norm – as evidenced by the state election results from eastern Germany.  

The next federal government will – note: a provocative thesis – probably be the last, for the time being, to be able to push through major, cross-federal structural reforms, legislative changes and programmes – including in the field of digitalisation – on the basis of a stable majority from the democratic centre.  

The challenges facing Germany in this regard – in times of wars, crises, dwindling financial leeway and political disruption in the US – are immense, indeed overwhelming. Germany and Europe must become more sovereign and resilient in all respects. This is particularly true in light of the protectionist and ‘chauvinistic’ political tendencies in the US, where international politics is not understood as the negotiation of compromises within a unilaterally applied framework, but rather as bilateral deal-making coupled with the law of the strongest. As Germany’s largest foreign trade partner and a global IT player, the US under Trump and Musk possesses significant ‘blackmail potential’, particularly through the dominant US tech giants and public cloud services.  

Particularly in the field of digitalisation, it is therefore urgently necessary to adopt a more sovereign and robust stance in areas that will determine the future: from cloud services and cyber security, through AI, to data and process sovereignty. This applies to the already lagging digitalisation of general public administration. But it also applies to the sector-specific digitalisation of the state apparatus, such as in defence (keyword: Software-Defined Defence) or in the judiciary (including the AI-supported judges’ workstation). The drive to maximise the (sovereign) digital returns must be pursued with even greater determination and is no place for watered-down, minimal compromises, an obsession with debt brakes or politically motivated coalition manoeuvring. Germany no longer has time for this. 

Will there be a Ministry for Digital Affairs at federal level? 

But let’s return to 23 February and what will then be a new federal government, which will have to address the question of a Ministry for Digital Affairs at federal level in order to give the issue of digitalisation – which is critical to success – greater weight and clout at the cabinet table. 

Key issues include, for example, enshrining the ‘once-only’ principle in law, enabling digital forms of identification for cross-sector services, and driving forward the strengthening of digital sovereignty through solutions ‘Made in Germany’ or ‘Made in Europe’. Furthermore, key and cross-cutting digital projects must receive greater political, financial and strategic attention – at all levels of local government. In other words, what is needed here is the overarching political will to reorganise the digital policy relationships between the federal government, the Länder and the local authorities. 

Focus IV: Long-term, cross-cutting infrastructure issues – which undoubtedly include large parts of the digitalisation of public administration – must also be co-funded on a permanent basis by the federal and state governments at local authority level. The current practice of ad hoc project funding (e.g. for smart city projects), which depends on time-limited funding schemes, often benefits only selected (pilot) local authorities and has little sustainable, widespread impact on citizens and businesses.  

Despite all the progress made with the (tentative) development of a central digital remit within the BMDV under the ‘traffic light’ coalition government, there are numerous key implementation challenges:  

• the continued high degree of fragmentation of digital issues across federal ministries
• the frequent mere stringing together of isolated and, in some cases, redundant ‘lighthouse projects’
• the inadequate implementation at the (federal) local level, coupled with a lack of uniform operational structures
• the lack of overarching IT governance (including standardisation)
• the lack of long-term, stable funding security

Against this backdrop, the question of establishing a standalone Ministry for Digital Affairs arises once more in the coming legislative period. Judging by the published election manifestos of the major parties and, furthermore, the reports on ‘Berlin-Mitte-Funk’, the following options are currently emerging in the political debate:  

1. Everything stays as it is 

Carrying on as before with a wide range of responsibilities spread across several ministries and, within them, across countless departments. The rationale for maintaining the status quo is that a complete reorganisation or restructuring would take too long and prove too costly. Furthermore, it would be politically difficult to sell the idea of creating a new ministry – with the corresponding increase in staff numbers – to the electorate.   

2. ‘Interim solution’ model: Minister of State in the Chancellor’s Office

Dorothee Bär, the Commissioner for Digitalisation, sends her regards. As little of substance was achieved back then apart from announcements such as flying taxis, there are considerations to at least equip the revived role with its own small department. But: would a new Chancellor really want to bring the complex issue of digitalisation – with its high implementation risks – directly into the Chancellery? 

3. Independent Ministry for Digitalisation

With a full administrative infrastructure – i.e. State Secretaries, departments, etc. Existing departments, for example from the BMI such as the DG and DV, would then be transferred to the new ministry by organisational decree. But: would it have its own budget or its own separate budget section? If so, would it be sufficiently large to enable it to act effectively? Would its remit be ‘limited’ to the digitalisation of public administration (cf. the current digital portfolio of the BMI) or extend beyond that? Would it have its own subordinate agencies (including for operational implementation)? 

4. A Federal Ministry for Digital Affairs and Innovation 

This would involve significantly expanding the current digital remit of the Federal Ministry of Transport. It would not only consist of digital infrastructure tasks such as fibre-optic roll-out and mobile networks (where progress has certainly been made under Minister Wissing), but would also create a comprehensive remit for digitalisation. In other words: all relevant departments from the current remit of the Federal Ministry of Digital and Transport (BMDV), the Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI), the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy (BMWK), etc., as well as relevant federal agencies such as the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI), the Federal Office for Information Technology, Telecommunications and New Media (ITZBund) and the Federal Office for Civil Protection and Disaster Control (BDBOS), would be transferred to the remit of the new ministry.  

5. Federal Ministry for Infrastructure and Digitalisation 

The big move – a sort of ‘super-ministry’ for infrastructure – comprising transport, telecommunications and energy infrastructures (see analogies with KRITIS regulation) and digitalisation. Federal authorities such as the Federal Network Agency would then also be included within the scope as a ‘foundation’. 

And as if there weren’t already enough agencies and semi-governmental bodies in the digital sector – which, according to a critical interpretation, ultimately merely mask the core administration’s inability to implement policy – there is speculation in options three to five about the establishment of a new digital agency to act as the ‘driving force’. That’s one way of doing it. But doesn’t the existing jumble of state digital responsibilities already prove that rampant fragmentation of responsibilities amounts more to a diffusion of accountability and implementation, making the whole system even more cumbersome to coordinate and thus slower? 

In my view, it would be better to further consolidate the existing ‘operational muscle’ – such as the ITZBund, the BVA and similar central IT bodies, provide them with adequate legal and financial resources, and thus make them truly operational – in other words, to enable a greater focus on genuine service provision and demand-driven approaches. 

Spotlight V: How do the parties position themselves in their election manifestos? 

• The CDU/CSU and FDP are in favour of creating a standalone Ministry of Digital Affairs, with ‘digital resources’ pooled within its remit.
• The SPD is not entering the race with a call for a dedicated digital ministry, but instead wants to pool the responsibilities for administrative digitalisation within an existing ministry.
• Alliance 90/The Greens speak – rather vaguely – merely of consolidating the competences, responsibilities and budget for digitalisation.
• In the already ‘thin’ election manifestos of the AfD and BSW, this issue does not appear to have been given serious consideration.