Merkel insists the long-awaited program is a true reflection of her party's ambitions. "There hasn't been such an honest election program for a long time," she told an audience at the unveiling of the manifesto on Monday. The German press, however, is not easily sated and is quick to pose a number of questions about the plan. Will it deliver the necessary boost to the economy? Is Merkel being too cautious? What will be the likely effect on German voters?

Die Welt is once again keen to set out its conservative, economically-liberal line and insists that any future conservative German government will be judged purely on whether "they are able to get a grip on the national finances and thereby contribute to economic recovery." Both conservative parties recognize this much at least, having produced an election manifesto that is "teeming with economic detail," although the paper acknowledges that in other areas the party platform is far less clear - on foreign policy and national security, for example.

In effect the conservatives have recognized that the people "don't want a new direction, as such," rather conservative politics which "make essential social structures like the state...the family and enterprise fully functional once again." The paper is not buying into suggestions that Merkel's party is copping out on tough decisions, rather they are confronting the necessary economic conditions and aspirations that the people expect of them. "That is courageous", the paper suggests, although "even more courageous would be to disappoint many of these expectations straight away, and explain that their will be no initial net-tax relief to speak of."

In other areas, the conservatives are more sketchy, laments the commentator. On social reforms, for example, there are few new ideas and instead "a cementing of the old principle of injecting fresh new tax receipts into unreformed social systems," continues. Fundamentally (and true to form), the paper believes "that hopes for a new beginning have been exaggerated", as the Union has not escaped from Schroeder's "over-complex" social system.

The center-left Sueddeutsche Zeitung believes Merkel could do with a dose of confidence herself. Merkel's heart is one of a "radical reformer," but "she is now afraid of her own courage. Her program is oddly mixed: half-honest - half-woolly; half-courageous - half timid." This, the paper says, is the crux of the Union's dilemma. "They don't want to appear as frightened of reality as the government," but still, the party is afraid of being too radical. Particularly now, given the recent rise of the left-wing coalition of parties led by the charismatic duo of Oskar Lafontaine and Gregor Gysi, the party fears that "disappointed SPD-voters, who would have transferred to the Union," will now move to the left instead. The solution is not to scare too many people off, the paper concludes. The proposed increase in VAT has at least given the Union the opportunity to distinguish themselves out from their possible future coalition partners, the liberal-minded FDP.

The conservative, and frequently sober, Frankfurter Allgemeine suggests that the conservatives' economic preoccupations mean the parties should really consider a name change. No longer should they be known as the "Christian Democratic Union", and "Christian Social Union" -- rather, the "C" should now stand for "commercial," the paper says. "The culmination of the Union's program is the decision to increase sales tax in exchange for a cut in employment costs." This gets to the core of Merkel's politics, insists the paper. "The costs of labor must be reduced for employers," it continues. The Union has not indicated a preference for tax relief and "will not promise it either." It is still unclear how the people will react to all of this. "Will the Liberals' (FDP) finger-wagging [over the proposed sales tax increase] make Merkel look like a naughty schoolgirl?" the paper asks, "of rather will it make the FDP look too clever for its own good?"

The voice of the left, Die Tageszeitung, is preoccupied with the threat of a grand-coalition. Should current opinion polls prove correct, it would only take a slight dip in the Union's political fortunes to make such an outcome a reality. Added to that, the Social Democrat's party leader, Franz Muenterfering, said yesterday that his party would not rule out such a coalition.

"Traditionally, the opposition promises blue skies and the government insists they have already arrived. This time around, things are different," the paper whimsically suggests. The parties must not be afraid to live in reality. For example, the Union has announced, "an increase in sales tax, that would have been taboo in all previous election campaigns...After the electorate's profound disappointment with Schroeder's politics, it would have had incalculable consequences, if a future-Chancellor Merkel had produced the same querulous sentiments as her predecessor."

"However, should a Merkel-led goevernment fail before the SPD have had time to recover, "then there really is little hope of salvation. In the worst case scenario, the country could fall into a deep depression and panic, opening the way for the dangerous populist politics of Oskar Lafontaine." Merkel knows this only too well, the paper acknowledges, and therefore avoids any risky talk of reforming the social system. "In turn, this could make compromise with the SPD much easier, should the electorate deliver a grand coalition."

Paul C. Martin, writing in the tabloid Bild, insists its time for a change of mood. "Jobs don't grow on trees," he exclaims, rather they come from sound business investment. After all, businesses are the ones who bear the risk. "If we'd have bellyached so much about costs after the war, instead of displaying such courage, we'd be in ruins today." The next government can't afford to mess around. "It's time for Angela Merkel to lift the mood -- at last." Martin is convinced: Germans can sort out the rest for themselves.

Business champion, the Financial Times Deutschland, today has three central themes, none of which will come as a surprise: "Growth -- Taxes -- Employees". "Merkel needs some rapid successes," if she is elected, the paper begins, not just out of economic necessity, but also for political expediency. "Only if growth and employment improve, even just a little, will a new government have room to maneuver." If not, spiralling unemployment benefits and a reduced tax base could lead to an immediate breach of trust. Merkel isn't promising a "Big Bang", the paper goes on, merely "a few further steps towards flexibility in the employment market and the refinancing of the social budget." On the one hand, sales taxes will increase. On the other, contributions to employment insurance will decrease. "The Union certainly won't promise free beer for everyone," the commentator sardonically points out.

Financial Times Deutschland also begins a new series on the European Union today, with a commentary by the British Ambassador to Germany, Sir Peter Torry. He begins by exploding the myth that, "The British want to turn the EU into a free trade zone, whilst the rest want political union." He insists that we must get past these crude stereotypes, if we are to move forward. After all, what kind of free trade zone, "demands that EU contributions to impoverished countries increase to 0.7 percent of GDP?" He continues, "Great Britain doesn't want to destroy the European social model. Labour brought in the minimum wage, signed the social charter and has invested millions in public services. Our social model works so well that unemployment in Britain is half that of France or Germany. We will always have a social Europe, but this can only survive if we face up to the demands of globalization."

Torry insists that if the EU is to grow in strength -- which the UK wants -- it must deliver economic stability, jobs, and trade. "Without money, our universities will fall further behind the likes of Stanford and Harvard and our scientists will emigrate." Yes, political foundations are required, the ambassador continues, however, "what Europe urgently requires is economic growth." Seventy percent of European GDP comes from the service sector. "If Europeans wish to remain world-leaders in this area, we need to encourage competition, not protectionism. It's time to end the culture of subsidies...Europe needs a budget which invests in the future," he concludes.

Of course, one would expect a British ambassador to toe the Blairite line. Therefore, in the same newspaper, there is an angry response by Sylvie Goulard, professor of international studies at France's well-respected CERI institute in Paris. "Though Blair's analysis, particularly with regards to economics, is often correct, he still offers hardly any solutions for Europe." Yes, things look a lot rosier in Britain, she concedes, but this isn't the whole story. "British society is coping better with the tribulations of globalization, but only because it has now tolerated social inequality for a long time." Blair's criticisms of agricultural subsidies, though solid in foundation, should simply be viewed as a "tactical maneuvre", not as a bid to rescue Europe.