Limitation Initiative: What Happens When Accepted? You have to know that

The SVP criticized the implementation of the MEI as a “breach of the constitution” – but did not take a referendum. Image: KEYSTONE

–

The mass immigration initiative, which was narrowly accepted on February 9, 2014 at 50.3 percent, is very similar to the current SVP template. The SVP’s first attempt to manage immigration as it saw it saw negotiations, but no compulsory termination of the Free Movement of Persons Agreement.

After the negotiations failed, an agreement was reached National and Council of States in the implementation of the new constitutional article among other things Make reporting obligations, The required maximum numbers and quotas did not come.

That bothered the SVP so much that it instead of a referendum equal a new popular initiative submitted. At that time, SVP President Albert Rösti justified that a referendum would “bring the population to the ballot box” without “bringing anything”.

Do the bilaterals have to be terminated?

The limitation initiative expressly requires that freedom of movement agreement is overridden by negotiation – or, if necessary, unilaterally terminated by the Federal Council.

It is feared that this will also have consequences for the bilateral treaties (the so-called «Bilateral I»). The free movement agreement is one of six agreements that are linked by the “guillotine clause”. These provide Swiss economy with “privileged access” to the EU market today, as the Federal Council writes.

The SVP itself does not deny that the bilaterals are questioned. For them, however, the danger is “unlikely”. “The EU is one of the profiteers of the contracts concerned and has a great interest in their continued existence,” said the initiative’s committee.

Who is in favor, who is against?

So far, the SVP is the only big party, which For expressed the initiative. This is also the SVP-close campaign for an independent and neutral Switzerland (Auns). The two SVP National Councilors Thomas Hurter and Diana Gutjahr publicly fight against the initiative of their own party.

From the parties on the other hand are: SP, Greens, EVP, GLP, BDP, CVP, FDP. Various associations are also opposed to this, including Economiesuisse, the Swiss Employers’ Association, the Association of Public Transport, the trade unions Syna, Unia, Travail.Suisse and the trade union confederation.

Federal Council and houses of Parliament recommend rejecting the initiative.

What are the advocates’ arguments?

The SVP criticizes the non-implementation of the deportation and immigration initiative. She wants to correct this with the limitation initiative and says that with her submission the “problem at the root” will be tackled.

• 10-million-Switzerland: The current immigration system allows tens of thousands to immigrate to the country every year. The SVP criticizes that this would cause concrete to be cast in concrete, streets and schools to be burdened, and apartments to become more expensive. The initiative would bring less immigration and thus relieve the infrastructure.
• Social works and labor market: The SVP criticizes that many immigrants are “cheap auxiliary workers”. The EU foreigners are more often unemployed, which affects the unemployment funds. The initiative will remedy the situation. Swiss companies could continue to recruit “highly qualified” people.
• Violence and identity: Swiss women would be committed to “the pillars of independence, federalism, direct democracy, armed neutrality and self-determination”. The argumentation about foreigners says that they are more often criminal and violent. “Moderate and controlled immigration” protects tradition and makes Switzerland “above all for women” safer.

Why do the opponents reject the initiative?

The opponents of the initiative are particularly bothered by the impending termination of the free movement agreement. Your arguments in detail:

• Economy: The FDP writes that the agreement would give Swiss companies “economic access to the EU’s 500 million market”. The termination would have “devastating consequences”, specifically a standstill or even a weakening of the economy.
• Protection of Wages: There are also fears that the initiative will also remove the wage protection for “Swiss wages” that was created because of the free movement of people. The “workers immediately feel this on their pay slips,” writes the trade union confederation.
• Relationship to the EU: If the agreement on the free movement of persons is terminated, further contracts would also cease to apply. The BDP mentions the Schengen-Dublin agreement: Switzerland benefits from cross-border police work. It could also send refugees who apply for asylum in several countries back to the first country.