Swiss voters look set to back a controversial proposal aimed at cutting immigration that could send shock waves through Switzerland and the EU. Editor Helena Bachmann says Swiss voters appear to have fallen victim to scare tactics.
On June 14th, Swiss voters will decide on one of the most controversial and potentially life-changing issues of the past decades: whether to impose caps on the number of EU immigrants allowed to work in the country.
The issue at hand, the ‘No to 10 million’ initiative spearheaded by the hard-right Swiss People’s Party (SVP), has been dominating the news for several months now, gaining momentum as the June referendum date is fast approaching.
Its basic premise is to reduce the influx of foreigners to Switzerland, so that the country’s population (currently just over 9.1 million) 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.
READ MORE: What exactly does the Swiss ‘no to 10 million’ anti-immigration proposal aim to do?
This is not the first time the SVP has launched this kind of proposal. In fact, combatting immigration, as well as Switzerland’s ties with the European Union is the party’s raison d’être.
What is different this time around is that – unlike the SVP’s previous attempts, which were soundly rejected in referendums – the ‘No to million’ looks likely to be approved by 52 percent of voters.
READ MORE: Majority of Swiss voters set to back anti-immigration proposal
While for the supporters of the initiative this a reason to rejoice, for those who have been sounding the alarm about its far-reaching consequences, it would signal the end of the prosperous Switzerland as we know it today.
Weighing in on the ‘pros’ and the ‘cons’
As I have been writing about this issue over the past months, I have carefully considered the views of both sides, and concluded that both have some merits.
For instance, the fear that the continued influx of foreigners would put an unsustainable pressure on the country’s infrastructure – a trend confirmed by demographers – is a real concern for a small nation like Switzerland, especially knowing how serious the housing shortage is in Swiss cities and how little land is available for new construction.
That is a legitimate concern, but while limiting immigration could possibly be seen as a solution to this one problem, what about the impact this measure would have on other aspects of life in Switzerland?
Cutting off the nose to spite one’s face
It is a proven fact, which even the SVP doesn’t deny, that Switzerland needs foreign workers to fill the shortages in the labour market.
Sectors such as healthcare, manufacturing, construction, and tourism would not be able to function without immigrants, seriously impacting the country’s economy and, consequently, the standard of living of its population.
True, the SVP says that some immigration from the EU would still be possible under the new law, but provides no clear answer as how, logistically, this would work.
What it does mention – for instance, the system of quotas imposed on all foreign workers, not just on those from third countries, as is currently the case – would result in major administrative and bureaucratic headaches.
The fact that the SVP has not outlined its plan in detail raises legitimate concerns.
“Among these uncertainties is how exactly migration would be managed,” Patrick Leisbach, migration and labour market expert at Avenir Suisse think tank, told The Local.
As for Benjamin Mühlemann, an FDP deputy who is part of the anti-initiative coalition, “businesses would be particularly affected by a planned economy with an extremely bureaucratic quota system for foreign workers. This would affect a wide range of economic sectors, including hospitality, construction and agriculture which would all suffer from a lack of qualified workers.”
Cutting ties with the EU
In addition, this move would endanger Switzerland’s treaties with the EU, and not just the one regulating immigration.
Critics of closer ties between Bern and Brussels may see this as a positive development, but the potential repercussions of such a move could be truly catastrophic.
It would bring Switzerland back to the 20th century when it was an isolated state in the middle of Europe, pretty much left to its own devices. This is not a good place to be when surrounded by EU-member nations.
I have been living here long enough to remember how it used to be: despite being wealthy, Switzerland was a politically isolated country.
For labour, it depended on seasonal workers, mostly from Italy, who “were not treated fairly by modern standards and faced harsh, discriminatory conditions. The system was designed to maximise economic contribution while minimising social integration or permanent settlement.”
This was pretty much the case until Switzerland signed the Agreement on the Free Movement of People with the European Union in 2001 – the system which is in place to this day and which guarantees not only the supply of qualified workforce for the labour market, but also working conditions on par with the Swiss.
Should the SVP’s measure be approved at the polls, however, this system could be at risk.
Another important area that could be affected is trade, which would have enormous consequences on the country’s economy, as Switzerland, landlocked and with no raw materials of its own, relies heavily on exports, primarily to and from EU states. (You could argue that there is always the US, but you know how this is working out).
Word(s) from the wise
I ultimately decided that a ‘yes’ vote would bring little benefit but and many downsides to Switzerland.
It is a telling sign, too, that the SVP stands pretty much alone in its stance, while the other political parties, the government, the parliament, economists, employers, and law enforcement agencies are all against the initiative.
READ MORE: Who is leading the fight in Switzerland against the anti-immigration proposal?
As Leisbach pointed out, the SVP initiative “would likely weaken Switzerland’s long-term growth, innovation, and prosperity.”
“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 said.
It would seem, then, that many supporters have been taken in by the SVP’s ‘scare tactic’, while ignoring the larger picture.
