Switzerland Today
Dear Swiss Abroad,
Now that the dust has settled, the “no” vote on the neutrality initiative remains the focus of media attention in Switzerland, but the issue is also attracting interest in the foreign press.
In our press review, we will also look at how the Swiss Abroad voted, before turning our attention to parliament, where debate has begun on one of the hottest topics of recent years: the agreements between Bern and Brussels.
Yesterday Swiss citizens living abroad voted almost identically to the rest of the Swiss population on the neutrality initiative, rejecting it decisively. The Swiss Abroad’s rejection of the food security initiative, however, was slightly less clear-cut.
The initiative calling for a stricter definition of Swiss neutrality to be enshrined in the constitution was rejected by 70.4% of the Swiss Abroad, compared with 70.2% of the electorate as a whole.
“Such uniformity is rare,” says Agnese Zucca, project manager at the gfs.bern institute. “It sends a clear message about what the population wants regarding neutrality, whether they live in Switzerland or abroad.” However, the result only partly surprises the expert. Swiss citizens living abroad generally represent a more urban and progressive electorate than those living at home, and Zucca would have expected an even clearer rejection from the Swiss Abroad.
Everything went according to expectations, however, with regard to the food security initiative, which called for the promotion of the production and consumption of plant-based foods in Switzerland. The proposal was rejected by 72.5% of voters, compared with “only” 63.4% of Swiss citizens living abroad. The latter are “more sensitive to environmental issues and almost always provide a counterpoint to the domestic population,” says Zucca.
The resounding rejection of the neutrality initiative is one of the most prominent topics in the Swiss media today, but the vote has also attracted the attention of several international media outlets.
Writing in the Swiss daily Le Temps, historian Sacha Zala emphasises that the wording of the text was “brilliant”. “The text evoked abstract principles without mentioning the one word that ultimately mattered: sanctions.” The public did not “fall into the trap”, but the campaigners may well have achieved what they set out to do, namely to spark a debate about the flexibility of Swiss neutrality. The concept, which gives the government room for manoeuvre, remains unclear to the public and could be restricted in future, argues Zala.
This is what yesterday’s big loser, former parliamentarian Christoph Blocher – who poured millions of francs into the yes campaign – hopes for in the pages of the Zurich-based Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ). Although deeply disappointed, he promises to keep fighting. “This was only the beginning of the debate,” he says.
Abroad, the result of the vote is being interpreted primarily through the prism of sanctions and relations with Russia. “The Swiss do not want to get too close to Putin,” states the German newspaper Die Zeit. The Corriere della Sera in Italy also highlights that “one of the most immediate and concrete consequences would have been Switzerland’s inability to impose sanctions on Russia”, as does the French newspaper Le Figaro.
Russia Today, a Kremlin-funded media outlet, writes that the rejection of the initiative “raises doubts about the management of the campaign, the use of funds and media coverage” in Switzerland. The outlet points out that, for Moscow, Switzerland’s current neutrality is “merely a façade” and quotes recent remarks by Russian foreign ministry spokesperson Maria Zakharova, who stated, for example, that “Bern stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the crimes committed by the regime in Kyiv”.
The number of workers living in poverty has never been so high in Switzerland since 2014, when the current calculation method was introduced, Caritas points out today, sounding the alarm over a social problem that is often underestimated.
There are 360,000 people living in income poverty in Switzerland – that is, people who, despite being in paid employment, are unable to make ends meet at the end of the month. This represents 8.8% of the working population. If those living in the same household are also included, the figure rises to 820,000 people.
The so-called working poor “often slip under the radar of the authorities and receive barely any state support”, emphasises Aline Masé, head of research and policy at Caritas Switzerland.
The organisation proposes specific measures that could be implemented without major reforms to the system. According to Caritas, what is needed, for example, are statutory minimum wages and sufficient, predictable levels of employment. “It is not only the welfare state that has responsibilities: employers must also play their part,” says Masé. “Collective agreements are an effective tool for establishing fair wages and working conditions.”
The Senate today began the eagerly awaited debate on the package of agreements with the European Union, known as the Bilaterals III. The debate will continue for three days, and five of the seven federal councillors will address the Senate.
The package comprises a first part on the stabilisation and updating of existing agreements. Among the topics covered are air and land transport, trade in foodstuffs and the free movement of persons. The second part aims to expand relations between Bern and Brussels, with new agreements in the fields of healthcare, food safety and electricity. The latter agreement will not be discussed during the current session, as the committee debate has not yet been concluded.
The package also contains accompanying measures at national level and four commitment credits: two relate to cohesion, one to migration and one to Switzerland’s participation in the Erasmus+ programme in 2027.
The right-wing Swiss People’s Party is fundamentally opposed to the entire package. The other parties, as well as the social partners and business associations, support it in principle but subject to certain conditions.
Several points are particularly contentious. First, wage protection across the country. The left and the trade unions may reconsider their support if they feel that jobs are not sufficiently protected. Second, there remains uncertainty over the type of referendum to be put to the people. Will it be an optional referendum, requiring only a simple majority of the electorate, or – as the Swiss People’s Party hopes – a mandatory referendum requiring a double majority of the electorate and the cantons?
Translated from Italian, sub-edited by Alexandra MV Andrist/ts
In compliance with the JTI standards
More: SWI swissinfo.ch certified by the Journalism Trust Initiative
