It’s a dispute about sport and sponsorship, but above all about money and morals. The sports city of Düsseldorf has presented the armaments group Rheinmetall as a new sponsor, which, among other things, is entering into a premium partnership with the first division handball club Bergischer HC – for example, it has applied its logo to the hall floor and does perimeter advertising. The deal has sparked a heated debate about the question: Who do we actually want to take money from?
–
It is not the first time that sporting and political Düsseldorf has had to deal with this question. In 2018, the Gauselmann Group became the name sponsor of the Düsseldorf Arena, which has since been called the “Merkur Spiel-Arena” and is adorned with a bright yellow sun. The FDP was outraged and wanted to reverse the deal with the arcade operator, the Greens were angry, and there were also internal arguments in the CDU about the decision. By the way, it couldn’t be undone. The debates about the name have now largely died down, but the name of the arena has not yet made it into everyday speech in Düsseldorf.
–
So now Rheinmetall. An armaments company that is, on the one hand, a company firmly rooted in Düsseldorf and – as several CDU politicians have pointed out – also pays a lot of trade tax here. But that earns its money to a significant extent with its “defense” area, i.e. with tanks, weapons, air defense systems. The Greens also accuse the company of business practices that are worthy of discussion: they do not want such a company to act as a financier.
–
The current situation not only reveals a conflict between the two parties, which is hardly surprising in terms of content, which actually have a cooperation in the Council and have acted largely harmoniously up to now. (Although the state parliament politicians of the Union have so far spoken out clearly on the matter, the council group has not yet positioned itself clearly.) Above all, however, it reveals that those responsible here apparently have learned remarkably little from old omissions in almost four years to have.
–
Because regardless of the question of whether you want to classify Rheinmetall as a good or hardly justifiable partner: Since the dispute about the arena, you should have urgently thought about the question of which criteria apply here. He had shown very clearly that Düsseldorf needs a clear guideline for the question of who it wants to take money for its sport from in the future.
–
How this is actually structured in practice is likely to become the subject of more extensive discussions. The Greens, for example, see the plans for an investment guideline as a basis for discussion – in addition to armaments companies, for example, companies that have had “blatant cases of bribery or corruption” in recent years, that genetically modify plants or seeds or that part of their group turnover from the business areas tobacco, alcohol, pornography, gambling, nuclear power, oil, coal or shale gas production.
–
Incidentally, the Bergische HC itself has so far held back on request in the debate and refers to the sports city as a contact person. However, it might make sense to at least include those in the debate early on and give them a chance to speak whose names and sporting appearances are influenced by the image of potential partners.
–
–
Related
