Whoever talks about poverty must not remain silent about immigration

Gradually it borders on hypocrisy. Whenever new figures on child poverty are released, federal and state opposition parties compete to be the loudest in lashing out at the inactive government. Recently it was that time again. The Bertelsmann Foundation announced that in 2022, 20.8 percent nationwide and even 24.6 percent in NRW of all under-18s were at risk of poverty - and the trend is rising. The nationwide leader among the municipalities is Gelsenkirchen with 42 percent.

At risk of poverty is anyone who lives in a SGB-2 household (previously called "Hartz IV household") or in a family that has less than 60 percent of the average household income - which was 1250 euros for single people in 2021. Of course, there are disadvantages and painful experiences associated with living in such circumstances. In this respect, the complaining social politicians are of course not hypocritical. However, it seems dishonest that they do not place the development of child poverty in the relevant context: in that of immense immigration.

According to the Bertelsmann Foundation, the current increase in child poverty is "mainly due to the children and young people who have fled Ukraine", i.e. to the largest refugee movement in decades. The previous increase in poor children was also due to a large migration movement.

According to the Hans Böckler Foundation, which is close to the union, 64 percent of all low-income under-18s in Germany had a migration background in 2020, and even 69 percent in North Rhine-Westphalia. This share has shot up by ten percentage points since 2015 – i.e. since the year of the other huge refugee immigration. When the opposition in many federal states now accuses their government of not having prevented the resulting child poverty, that is simply disingenuous. All measures have their limits if they are to compensate for the consequences of such massive immigration in the short term. After all, more than 200,000 mostly destitute children came from the Ukraine alone.

Of course, there are ideas worthy of discussion for tackling child poverty. Yes, it would probably be a small part of the solution to introduce basic child security. Most federal states have been increasing their aid for poor families for years. Yes, it would be helpful to set up even more family centers in focus daycare centers than before. And yes, it would be overdue to start personnel offensives for day care centers and schools that deserve the name - even if the federal and state governments have been constantly increasing their investments in education for years.

But no country in the world can train as many educators, teachers and social workers in a few years, invest as much money in poor families and provide as much job placement for poor parents as these waves of immigration demand. In years of record immigration, you can only be one thing: a country that takes in large numbers of refugees – or a country with shrinking child poverty.

Unfortunately, this insightful connection is rarely mentioned. Why? A spokeswoman for the Bertelsmann Foundation told this newspaper at least one of the reasons why many experts and politicians are reluctant: Because they don't want to stir up anti-immigrant tendencies.

That is certainly honorable - but dangerously unenlightened. Anyone who treats immigration like a sacred cow and de facto sacralizes it destroys their credibility. Every historical trend has its pros and cons. Should it only be different with migration? Every drug has its side effects, as the Corona period has taught us. But the immigration of a million people is not supposed to have any negative consequences or even problematic side effects? In the usual politicians' diction, the price of immigration only appears in homeopathic doses. And no one can believe that anymore.

Of course, our schools and daycare centers are also in a bad way because these institutions have had to cope with huge waves of immigration since 2015. And of course we can't get a handle on the numbers relating to children at risk of poverty because so many new children are immigrating, who according to our definitions are mostly at risk of poverty. Citizens have the right not to be deprived of these elementary connections.

Just because something has a price doesn't mean it's bad. It goes without saying that not all immigrants are in need or entitled to help. And it is also true that our options are limited. Our wide open arms, with which we welcomed over a million Ukrainian war victims, are undoubtedly one of the gestures we can be proud of. In fact, we can be all the more proud the more aware we are of the price they charge.