Switzerland’s government has outlined not only the downsides it sees if the ‘No to 10 million’ initiative passes in June, but also some potentially positive aspects of the proposal.
The Federal Council – along with the Parliament, most political parties, cantonal and municipal governments, economists, employers’ associations, and law enforcement agencies – has been urging the voters to reject the Swiss People’s Party (SVP) proposal that seeks to limit the number of foreigners from the EU allowed to work in Switzerland.
Swiss voters will vote on the proposal when they go to the polls on June 14th. The latest opinion polls suggest the public will back the anti-immigration proposal.
READ MORE: Who is leading the fight in Switzerland against the anti-immigration proposal?
Despite the government’s opposition A recent study commissioned by the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM), which analyses the consequences of limiting immigration, also spells out the potential ‘flip side’ of the measure – that is, its positive points.
Let’s look at the downside first – all the reasons the government is against the SVP’s initiative:
Labour shortages
Certain key sectors, including healthcare and social services; manufacturing; construction; tourism and hospitality; as well as IT, would be particularly affected by immigration restrictions.
This shortage would only be partially offset by the digitalisation of certain tasks or better integration of women and older workers into the labour market.
Less money for the state pension (AHV/AVS)
It has been established that foreign workers contribute more into Switzerland’s social insurance scheme than they withdraw from it.
Therefore capping immigration would stem the flow of money into the state pension fund, as Switzerland’s population is aging and birth rate remains low.
The study estimates the potential long-term loss for the AHV/AVS fund at nearly 6 billion francs per year.
End of free movement
The termination of the agreement on the free movement of persons would trigger the end of all bilateral agreements that Switzerland has with the European Union.
This move would cost an estimated 520 billion francs over 20 years, not to mention the damages to Switzerland’s economy, trade, security, as well as education and research.
And now for the positive points outlined in the report:
Help ease the housing shortage
The report concedes that since the introduction of free movement in 2002, foreign wokers have contributed to rising rent and property prices, as well as to overall housing shortage.
Therefore, limiting immigration would reverse this trend, particularly in urban centres where housing demand is highest.
However, the study also emphasises that immigration is only one factor among others, such as not enough construction.
READ MORE: Why is Switzerland not building enough housing for its growing population?
Less spending on welfare
Less money would be spent on social aid, since foreign nationals use this assistance more frequently than Swiss citizens (27.7 percent versus 10.2 percent).
Additionally, in the field of education, the need for school infrastructure would drop significantly: the study estimates 130,000 fewer school-aged children by 2100, which translates to approximately 1,000 fewer schools (though the fact that Switzerland’s birth rate is at its Lowest also plays a role).
Reduced pressure on the environment
According to the study, population reduction would decrease overall resource consumption and land use.
Also, the need for transportation infrastructure would be lower, waste production would decrease, and greenhouse gas emissions would be reduced.
