The hard-right Swiss populists behind the ‘No to 10 million people’ initiative tell The Local why excessive immigration has been bad for the country, whilst opponents and analysts argue the country’s future depends on it.
The contentious “no to 10 million” anti-immigration initiative, spearheaded by the hard right Swiss People’s Party (SVP), seeks to drastically reduce the influx of foreigners to Switzerland, so that the country’s population doesn’t exceed the 10-million mark, which the populist party says will overburden key infrastructure, such as housing, public transport, the health system, and schools.
The proposal stipulates that “Switzerland’s permanent resident population must not exceed ten million people before 2050. From 2050 onwards, the Federal Council may adjust this limit annually.”
Currently, the country’s population stands at just over 9 million, including nearly 2.5 million foreign nationals – that is, over 27 percent of the population.
To achieve this goal, the SVP demand that both the federal government and the cantons “ensure sustainable population development, in particular with a view to protecting the environment and in the interest of the sustainable conservation of natural resources, the performance of infrastructure, healthcare, and Swiss social security.”
READ ALSO: What exactly does the Swiss ‘no to 10 million’ anti immigration proposal aim to do?
As is the case with every divisive issue that will be decided in a referendum, this particular proposal also has its supporters and opponents, with each camp trying to convince the voting public of their arguments, and the dire consequences of choosing the ‘wrong’ path.
Advertisement
‘Erosion of Swiss identity’
An SVP deputy Yvan Pahud, one of the initiative’s instigators, believes that, because of the “migration-driven demographic explosion forecast,” limiting immigration is essential for Switzerland’s future. It is even more urgent to do so, he says, because one EU regulation would allow citizens of the European Union to live in Switzerland without having a job.
“This means opening the floodgates to even more uncontrolled immigration,” Pahud told The Local.
“It would cause a terrible strain on infrastructure, a loss of our quality of life, and the gradual erosion of our Swiss identity.”
Despite the clear anti-foreigners message, Pahud, and his other SVP colleagues, insists that his party “is not against all immigration.”
Instead, he says, “it advocates for immigration regulation that takes into account several criteria, such as the needs of the Swiss economy, the protection of the climate, biodiversity, and resources (water and energy), wage protection, as well as security.”
He also pointed out that the proposal is not quite as drastic or radical as many people believe it to be.
“Limited immigration, tailored to the needs of the labour market, will remain possible,” if the initiative is accepted in a referendum, Pahud said.
Advertisement
‘Moderate immigration’
“Uncontrolled and excessive immigration is the primary cause of the most pressing and significant problems facing Switzerland,” another SVP deputy, Thomas Matter, said in an interview with The Local, explaining why he and his party had spearheaded the initiative in the first place.
Like Pahud, he too said that the SVP “is not against immigration, but against uncontrolled mass immigration.”
“We have always advocated for managed and moderate immigration. Unfortunately, today almost anyone can come to our country, regardless of whether there is actually a shortage of skilled workers or not.”
“For us, immigration must be managed according to the interests of the entire economy,” Matter added.
Advertisement
Negative impact
Others, however, point out that immigration has been highly beneficial to Switzerland and curbing it would not be in the country’s best interests.
“The initiative would likely weaken Switzerland’s long-term growth, innovation, and prosperity,” Patrick Leisbach, migration and labour market expert at Avenir Suisse think tank told The Local.
“A flexible and market-oriented migration system has served the country well. In contrast, rigid population limits and bureaucratic control would stifle economic dynamism and gradually erode one of Switzerland’s key competitive advantages,” he added.
Another drawback of curbed immigration: “A fixed population ceiling would exacerbate demographic imbalances in Switzerland,” Leisbach pointed out. “The ratio of working-age people to retirees would fall further, with implications for public finances and social security.”
READ ALSO: How immigrants keep Switzerland’s economy running
Advertisement
‘Not the right approach’
On the political arena, the SVP stands alone in its support of the immigration-curbing initiative.
On behalf of the Federal Council, Justice and Police minister Beat Jans pointed out that such a move “would isolate Switzerland internationally and create significant insecurity,” especially as it could mean renegotiating or even ending the Free Movement of People agreement between Switzerland and the EU,
“The British have experienced what it means to leave access to the single market and free movement,” he said, “And the majority of the country now regrets Brexit. We must learn from this lesson.”
A similar message has been sounded by the National Council’s Political Institutions Commission.
“Setting a population cap is not the right approach to ensuring sustainable demographic growth. In the future, a workforce will be needed to provide essential services, such as elderly care and hospital services. This need cannot be met without immigration,” the Commission concluded.
Marco Taddei, head of international affairs at the Swiss Employers Association, also sees risks for Switzerland if the SVP’s proposal were to be accepted.
“In a context of labour shortages, abandoning the free movement of people with the EU would be self-destructive,” he said. “The growing staffing needs of businesses cannot be met solely by Swiss workers. In high-value-added sectors, the ideal candidate is often found abroad.”
Advertisement
What happens next?
The vote will most likely take place in 2026, though no exact date has been set.
Until then, the SVP will campaign to persuade the voters to approve the initiative, while the opponents – including the government, most political parties, as well as economists – will argue that the proposal will be detrimental to Switzerland’s future.
In the end, as has always been the case under Switzerland’s unique system of direct democracy – the citizens will decide the referendum’s outcome.
At this point, it is too early to say what the result will be, though one nationwide poll carried out in September 2025, indicates that, far from being rejected outright, the proposal could be accepted – even if by a very narrow majority of voters.
READ ALSO: Will Swiss voters back the anti-immigration proposal?
