Talk:Cabinet of Germany

Vice-Chancellor

This title or office doesn't exist in Germany otherwise in Austria. If wikipedia will be an encyclopedia, it should use the correct terms. it's just the deputy of the federal chancellor. Even if the media use the term, it's incorrect!

Merkel cabinet

The list under Merkel cabinet is inconsistent with the news I have read about the coalition agreement. In particular, reports stated (eg. NYT)that the Ministership for Economics and Labor was to be split into two posts, with the Finance post going to Stoiber, and the Labor post going to the SPD. Where did the information for the current table come from? --- Charles Stewart 01:46, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

I have read several stories which indicate that SPD will get finance, foreign affiars, justice and labor while Stoiber will get the "economy ministry". It is conceivable that Stoiber is intended to get a ministry as a result of a split of the existing Economics and Labor portfolio however I have not seen any mention of this in any of the coverage I have read. Perhaps you could provide a link to the article in which such a split is reported? Here is the most recent link backing up the above from Reuters it refers to SPD in Labor and Stoiber in an "economy and technology" portfolio but it is unclear whether this is an evolution of the exisiting Economic Development portfolio or a split of Economics and Labor. In my mind, it is best for us to assume no chance in the structures of ministries unless there is a source that says otherwise - Jord 13:09, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Mea cupla. After reading the new article I posted above, which I had not yet read, it is clear that SPD will continue to hold the economic development & cooperation ministry thus Stoiber must indeed be getting a ministry created out of Economics and Labour. I have changed the article to reflect this. - Jord 13:24, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

A search for "stoiber economics-minister" gives dozens of hits confirming this appointment. The detail about the split of the economics and labor ministry I read in the New York Times, and I can't find a URL for the story (it is probably not open anymore), and in the Financial Times via LexisNexis (Oct 11, Gerrit Wiesmann, Horse-trading is still far from over), which has lots of detail on the agreement. FT doesn't open much of its content to non-subscribers, though, I'm afraid. --- Charles Stewart 14:47, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

FT quote

Why don't I just quote some of the article? From the Financial Times article I cited above:

One crucial aspect of the agreement was the distribution of portfolios between the parties. In addition to the chancellery and the chancellery's chief of staff - a post that is being upgraded to a full cabinet portfolio - the CDU and the Christian Social Union, its Bavarian sister party, are to receive six portfolios.

The economics ministry will be stripped of its labour market element and renamed the economics and innovation ministry. The new portfolio, which will go to Edmund Stoiber, the CSU chairman, will also spearhead European Union negotiations in industry policy.

The CDU and CSU will also run the defence, interior affairs, consumer protection and agriculture, education and research, and family ministries.

The SPD's portfolios will include foreign policy, finance, a new labour and social security portfolio carved out of the old economics and health ministries, development, justice, environment, transport, and the new health ministry amputated from its social security component.

Among the most urgent decisions to be made is the staffing of the ministries, which an SPD spokeswoman said should become clear about halfway through the coalition negotiations.

The distribution of the portfolios is particularly controversial within the SPD, where the left and right wings of the party are battling for influence. Some of the names of possible SPD ministers being floated yesterday - Peer Steinbruck, the former state premier of North Rhine-Westphalia, and Ulla Schmidt and Brigitte Zypries, respectively social security and justice ministers in the outgoing government - could be unacceptable to the left. "I would be very careful with all these names," a member of the SPD's Prasidium (the party's 13-strong executive) told the Financial Times yesterday. "Nothing, absolutely nothing is clear right now."

CDU/CSU ministers are likely to include former CDU leader Wolfgang Schauble and CSU vice-chairman Horst Seehofer. Ms Merkel is also lining up two of her close female allies in regional governments - Annette Schavan and Ursula von der Leyen - as education and family ministers respectively.

Hope it's interesting. --- Charles Stewart 14:50, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Interesting indeed. As I indicated in my "mea cupla" above, I had already split the economics and labour portfolios on the main page before you posted these articles. - Jord 14:52, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Bundesregierung August 2007

http://www.finanztreff.de/ftreff/news--a.sektion.nachrichten.r.0.awert..id.27300377.headline.Bundeskabinett_will_Risiken_aus_Finanzinvestitionen_begrenzen.-b.enMmgtfDquYCTUEh8CsD3A.html 192.194.84.253 11:09, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Could you explain the significance of this link. Is the reader expected to use this German language magazine article/advert to improve the Wikipedia article? I notice that here and on the German Wikipedia you have added several marginally relevant links to talk and article pages. Most seem to link to press articles. It looks a bit like a "search engine optimization" trick.--Boson 21:11, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

The cabinet and the Federal Government

Are "Cabinet of Germany" and "Federal Government of Germany" really synonyms? (compare Cabinet of the United Kingdom and Her Majesty's Government). UweBayern (talk) 01:51, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

The problem is that the word government ("Regierung") is used in a much narrower sense in German, more like the English word "Administration". So yes, both words are often used synonymously though it could be argued that Bundesregierung (like "Administration") is still a bit more comprehensive than "cabinet". --93.129.124.125 (talk) 19:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

@UweBayern: I requested the retitling of the article. You are welcome to share your opinion in the section "Requested move 6 December 2024". Essixt (talk) 18:53, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Minority government

Does anyone knows is by german constitution opportunity to form minority government?--Ventusa (talk) 07:02, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

In general yes, but it has never happened yet except the cabinet schmidt IV, which only lasted 14 days after the fdp had left the coalition and before kohl won the constructive vote of no confidence in 1982. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810A:D40:56C:E8C8:1C61:CD7C:1BE (talk) 21:53, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Cabinet of Albania which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RM bot 19:46, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Article title

Considering the Government itself prefers the term Bundesregierung or Federal Government (https://www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en), should that not be the title of this article, or at the very least the first name listed in the Introduction? I have listened to German and Swiss news for a few years now, and I have rarely, if ever, heard the Government called a "Kabinett", especially outside of the context of elections. However, I would like to hear the opinions of more experienced editors or people with closer ties to Germany as well. Toadspike (talk) 05:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

As further justification for this change, the Grundgesetz (German constitution, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/gg/BJNR000010949.html) mentions "Regierung" over a hundred times, while "Kabinett" does not appear once. Toadspike (talk) 05:48, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

The german government is referred to solely as the Federal Government (Bundesregierung). Compare the German Wikipedia article (de.wiki.x.io/wiki/Bundesregierung_(Deutschland)), the legal texts and the website of the Federal Government (www.bundesregierung.de/breg-en). The federal government consists of the federal cabinet (Bundeskabinett), which is made up of the federal chancellor and the federal ministers. However, the word "Bundeskabinett" has no legal meaning in Germany and is not widely used in German. As a German, I therefore also stumbled across the title of this article, which needs to be changed. Essixt (talk) 15:51, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

@Toadspike: I requested the retitling of the article. You are welcome to share your opinion in the section. Essixt (talk) 17:53, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Requested move 6 December 2024

Cabinet of Germany → Federal Government of Germany – "Federal Government of Germany" is the natural, precise, concise and above all consistent title. On the other hand, "Cabinet of Germany" is not commonly recognizable and not a title that readers are likely to look or search for if they wanted to find the German government. Furthermore, the current title is colloquial and legally (see Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany, sixth section, "VI. The Federal Government") and technically incorrect. The title also differs from all other search engine results on this topic and the official website itself.

References

— Essixt (talk) 12:00, 6 December 2024 (UTC) — Relisting. ~/Bunnypranav:<ping> 08:05, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• Strong support. Wow, it's been a hot sec since I raised this issue. Back then, I knew nothing of requested moves or our policies on article titles. My opinion hasn't changed, though: "Cabinet of Germany" is an informal term referring to only part of the government, and this article should be retitled "Federal Government of Germany". Looking at recent coverage of the collapse of Olaf Scholz's government, media outlets clearly prefer "government" to "cabinet", often using "government" exclusively. [1][2][3] This shows that the COMMONNAME here is "government". And this Ngrams search seems to say the same. It might also be worth retitling related articles like Scholz cabinet to Scholz government, but I won't die on that hill. Toadspike [Talk] 18:14, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

  Thank you for your opinion and I agree with you. However, when distinguishing between governments in the various legislative periods, the term "cabinet" is actually preferred over "government" (at least in German-speaking countries), which is why I think that the titles of at least these related articles do not need to be changed. I tried to untangling this complex of terms in the third section of the introduction of this article. Essixt (talk) 18:41, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

  Thanks for the clarification. I have struck that part of my comment. Toadspike [Talk] 19:11, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. There is a difference between a cabinet (the group of senior ministers who meet to govern a country at the highest level) and a government (the whole machinery of government headed by the cabinet). -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Necrothesp Precisely because I am aware of this difference, the article title must be changed. This article is not about "the group of senior ministers who meet to govern a country at the highest level" but rather about the constitutional body, the federal government. In other words, "the whole machinery of government headed by the cabinet". Furthermore, it must be correctly stated that the constitutional body "Federal Government" only includes the Chancellor and the Federal Ministers, while the Federal Cabinet is an extended body which, in addition to the Federal Government, also includes the Head of the Federal Chancellery and its Parliamentary State Secretary, the Head of the Federal President's Office, the Head of the Federal Press Office and the Personal Assistant to the Federal Chancellor. It is therefore factually incorrect that this article has "Cabinet" in the title, although its topic is actually the federal government. Essixt (talk) 21:26, 18 December 2024 (UTC)

  But the article as it stands appears to be about the cabinet. Most of it consists of a list of cabinet members. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:58, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

  @Necrothesp This is because the core component of a government are logically the ministers and the Federal Chancellor, who are listed there. However, it is not a list of the "cabinet", but of the members of the government (I explain this in the second paragraph). As is clear from the introduction to this article, however, this article is not about a group of officials, but about the constitutional body: "[...] is the chief executive body of the Federal Republic of Germany and exercises executive power at the federal level." And this executive body is the Federal Government which consists of the Federal Chancellor and the Federal Ministers.
  The Federal Cabinet, in turn, is an extended committee, which includes the Federal Government (consisting of the Federal Chancellor and Federal Ministers), the Head of the Federal Chancellery and its Parliamentary State Secretary, the Head of the Office of the Federal President, the Head of the Federal Press Office and the Personal Advisor to the Federal Chancellor. The Federal Cabinet is also not constitutionally legitimate and the only correct title for the constitutional body described in this article is "Federal Government". This is clear from the official website, the German political encyclopedia and the Basic Law. What one can of course do is to present the connection between the Federal Government (constitutional body) and the Federal Cabinet (a group of persons) in this article about the constitutional body (Federal Government), which I have done in the third paragraph of the introduction. As an additional argument, I would like to point out that both the "Regulations" and "Functioning" sections only deal with the Federal Government as a constitutional body and the respective statements are always based on the regulations of the sixth section of the Basic Law, which only knows the Federal Government as a constitutional body and not the informal and legally non-existent "Federal Cabinet" committe. I am convinced that we should not invent a state's constitutional body in Wikipedia, but should present the existing ones. Essixt (talk) 15:01, 19 December 2024 (UTC)

References