FPÖ criticism: Hacker's minimum security a political deception!

FPÖ criticism: Hacker's minimum security a political deception!

The debate about minimum income in Vienna has gained momentum. On June 15, 2025, the social spokesman for the Vienna FPÖ, LAbg. Wolfgang Seidl, was critical of the planned changes by SPÖ city councilor Peter Hacker. Seidl described Hacker's proposal as a political deception that would not bring any real reforms. He argued that the measures merely implement a process that has already been decided at the federal level without addressing the specific problems in Vienna.

A central concern of the FPÖ is the high volume of minimum benefits, which allows around 700 million euros to flow to non-Austrians every year. Seidl emphasizes that Vienna is the largest social magnet for asylum seekers in Austria. This becomes particularly clear when you look at the number of people entitled to subsidiary protection: out of a total of 11,404 in Austria, almost 9,416 live in Vienna, i.e. 82.6% of those affected. The FPÖ is calling for a fundamental course correction: those entitled to subsidiary protection should only be entitled to basic services and not to the full minimum income.

Minimum security and social benefits

The requirement for minimum income in Vienna is particularly high. Currently, almost 142,000 people in the city receive this benefit, while excluding Vienna there are a total of 77,100 recipients in Austria. The discussion about social support is also being conducted against the background of the various residence rights for asylum seekers and those entitled to subsidiary protection. The latter have a temporary right of residence that can be extended annually. In contrast, those entitled to asylum have a permanent right of residence.

The minimum security for those entitled to asylum is 1,155.84 euros for single people, and cohabitants receive 70% of this amount. In comparison, the basic supply is around 400 euros. The Constitutional Court has emphasized an objective justification for the different treatments in social welfare law practice. This happens against the background of the minimum standard from the European Convention on Human Rights, which, however, is not specifically quantified.

Criticism and demands

The Vienna SPÖ, supported by city councilor Peter Hacker, advocates full entitlement to social assistance for those entitled to subsidiary protection. In contrast, ÖVP leader Karl Mahrer is calling for social benefits to be capped at the level of basic services. This is happening in a context that is characterized by criticism of the overloading of the infrastructure in Vienna.

The low number of benefits actually used, together with the FPÖ's explicit demand for a more streamlined approach, shows that the discussion about minimum income in Vienna is far from over. The pressure at the political level remains high, while at the same time statistics remain relevant to monitor developments in this area. According to Statistics Austria data, minimum income and social assistance cover benefits to secure livelihoods and housing needs for various groups, including people without health insurance.

The topic remains complex, and it will be exciting to see how the political parties continue to position themselves and what measures are ultimately implemented in practice.

You can find more information in the articles from OTS, courier and Statistics Austria.