Federal popular initiative "For moderate immigration"

The Swiss popular initiative "For a moderate immigration (limitation initiative )" (sometimes called the " termination initiative " ) was submitted on August 31, 2018 by the Swiss People's Party (SVP) and the Action for an Independent and Neutral Switzerland (AUNS).

The popular initiative was launched because, in the opinion of the initiators, the Federal Assembly and the Federal Council did not implement the “mass immigration initiative” adopted on February 9, 2014 (see the “Implementation” chapter in the “mass immigration initiative ” article).

Of the parties represented in the federal parliament, the initiative was only supported by the SVP, the EDU and the Lega dei Ticinesi . It was recommended for rejection by the CVP , BDP , FDP , GLP , EPP , SP and the Greens as well as by the National Council (with 142 to 53 votes), the Council of States (37 to 5) and the Federal Council .

The voting date on May 17, 2020 has been postponed to September 27, 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic . The Swiss people rejected the initiative with 61.7% no votes. It received a majority in only four cantons - Schwyz , Glarus , Appenzell Innerrhoden and Ticino .

initiative

content

The initiative called for an independent immigration regulation to Switzerland without the free movement of persons . The agreement on the free movement of persons with the European Union is to be dissolved through negotiations within a year, otherwise it will be terminated unilaterally.

Initiative text

The federal constitution is amended as follows:

Art. 121b Immigration without free movement of persons

¹ Switzerland regulates the immigration of foreigners independently.
² No new international treaties may be concluded and no other new international legal obligations may be entered into, which grant foreign nationals the freedom of movement of persons.
³ Existing international treaties and other international legal obligations may not be adapted or expanded in contravention of paragraphs 1 and 2.

Art. 197 no. 12

12. Transitional provisions to Art. 121b (immigration without free movement of persons)

¹ By negotiation, the aim should be for the agreement of June 21, 1999 between the Swiss Confederation, on the one hand, and the European Community and its member states, on the other hand, on freedom of movement to cease to apply within twelve months of the acceptance of Article 121b by the people and the cantons.
² If this does not succeed, the Federal Council shall terminate the agreement in accordance with paragraph 1 within a further 30 days.

Consultations

In its dispatch in June 2019 , the Federal Council asked the Federal Assembly to recommend the initiative to be rejected without a counter-proposal . In its dispatch, the Federal Council recognized that immigration is also associated with challenges, but pointed out that these are already being countered with various measures. The main reason he justified his rejection was that the elimination of freedom of movement would have detrimental consequences for Switzerland as a business location and, in the event of unilateral termination, the bilateral agreements with the EU on the " guillotine clause " and the agreements on the dismantling of technical barriers to trade and public procurement, research, air and land transport, and agriculture.

In its plenary assembly on September 27, 2019, the conference of cantonal governments spoke out against the initiative, as it would jeopardize the entire package of bilateral agreements and thus access to the EU internal market . On December 20, 2019, the Federal Assembly decided to recommend the people and the cantons to reject the initiative.

Arguments

Favorable arguments

The SVP justified the initiative as follows:

• Switzerland has lost control of immigration. There are currently no effective instruments to control and limit immigration. The uncontrolled influx from the European Union and the open borders are primarily responsible for this.
• Unchecked immigration has negative consequences, including the following effects:

• Immigrants from the EU displaced workers from third countries, who in turn did not return to their home countries and put a strain on Swiss social security institutions.
• The streets and trains are overcrowded; Rents and land prices exploded.
• Wages came under pressure.

Negative arguments

A committee made up of politicians from the CVP, BDP, FDP, GLP, Greens and EPP parties was founded against the initiative. Some of the arguments put forward were:

• The initiative violates the agreement on the free movement of persons with the EU and would therefore lead to the termination of the entire Bilateral Agreements I , as they are linked to one another via a guillotine clause . This would also eliminate the mutual recognition of conformity assessments , which is why the consequences for SMEs and export-oriented companies would be severe. Accordingly, leading entrepreneurs such as former SVP National Councilor Peter Spuhler are against the initiative.
• The initiative exacerbates the shortage of skilled workers in Switzerland. The economy is urgently dependent on immigration. Thanks to the free movement of people, the shortage of workers could be recruited flexibly and unbureaucratically in EU countries.
• Switzerland earns every second Swiss franc in its dealings with other countries. The State Secretariat for Economic Affairs states that the opening of the Swiss labor market to the EU and EFTA states has enabled the Swiss economy to experience above-average growth in recent years.

Position references

Of the parties represented in the Federal Assembly, the SVP , the EDU and the Lega dei Ticinesi spoke out in favor of the initiative. It was rejected by the FDP , the BDP , the CVP , the GLP , the EPP , the SP and the Greens .

Publicly oppose the initiative position also related, among other things the Business Federation economiesuisse , the Swiss Trade Association , the Swiss employers 'association , the unions Syna and Unia and the trade union confederations Swiss Federation of Trade Unions and Travail Suisse , the Rectors' Conference of the Swiss Universities Swissuniversities and the ETH Board , the Association of public transport and the political movement Operation Libero . The association Avenir 50 plus, which represents the over 50-year-old unemployed, displaced persons and welfare recipients, and the association Ecopop (association environment and population) expressed their support for the acceptance of the initiative .

Economists tried to assess and quantify the influence of the previously practiced free movement of persons on the Swiss economy. A British study came to the conclusion that welfare in Switzerland has decreased since the free movement of persons for EU residents. The majority of Swiss economists came to the opposite conclusion, according to a study by economiesuisse . Reiner Eichenberger took the view that these studies did not take into account the consequences of the free movement of people such as the scarcity and increase in land costs, costs for additional infrastructure and the necessary expansion of the educational system, as well as for accompanying measures.

The umbrella organization of the Swiss universities, swissuniversities , spoke out in favor of no. It jeopardizes two important bilateral agreements for Swiss universities: the free movement of people and the European research framework programs. Without the free movement of people, Switzerland as a center of education and research runs the risk of losing its leading position, and exclusion from European research framework programs would severely hinder research projects in Switzerland.

description

The opponents described the initiative as a termination initiative and meant that the end of the free movement of persons because of the guillotine clause would lead to an end of the bilateral agreements with the EU. The term termination initiative, however, comes from Christoph Blocher , who threatened a termination initiative for the first time in 2014 and doubled it in 2016 by announcing in the event that there would be no quotas and maximum numbers : then we will launch a termination initiative .

Opinion polls

Institute	Client	date	Yes	Rather yes	Tie No answer	Rather no	No
LeeWas GmbH	Tamedia	September 11, 2020	30th	3	2	3	62
if necessary Bern	SRG SSR	September 6, 2020	25th	10	2	13th	50
LeeWas GmbH	Tamedia	August 28, 2020	31	6th	2	5	56
LeeWas GmbH	Tamedia	August 11, 2020	33	8th	3	6th	50
if necessary Bern	SRG SSR	August 9, 2020	24	11	4th	15th	46
if necessary Bern	Interpharma	May 18, 2020	13th	16	2	18th	51
LeeWas GmbH	Tamedia	20th December 2019	26th	9	7th	10	48

Comments: Figures in percent. The date indicates the mean time of the survey, not the time the survey was published.

Referendum

Voting results by cantons

After the Federal Council decided on March 18, 2020, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, not to hold the ballot originally planned for May 17, 2020, the vote was postponed to September 27, 2020.

The Swiss people rejected the initiative with 61.7% no votes. It received a majority in only four cantons - Schwyz, Glarus, Appenzell Innerrhoden and Ticino.

Yes (3 ¹ ⁄ ₂ stands)

No ( 17 ⁵ ⁄ ₂  stands)

«Limitation Initiative» - preliminary official final results

Canton	Yes (%)	No (%)	Participation (%)
Aargau	42.43%	57.57%	57.03%
Appenzell Ausserrhoden	43.55%	56.45%	63.33%
Appenzell Innerrhoden	54.29%	45.71%	57.28%
Basel-Country	38.60%	61.40%	57.54%
Basel city	25.35%	74.65%	59.82%
Bern	38.65%	61.35%	60.26%
Freiburg	35.44%	64.56%	59.10%
Geneva	31.02%	68.98%	54.13%
Glarus	50.47%	49.53%	54.67%
Grisons	40.87%	59.13%	61.48%
law	31.85%	68.15%	59.10%
Lucerne	40.19%	59.81%	61.07%
Neuchâtel	28.88%	71.12%	54.75%
Nidwalden	47.63%	52.37%	65.46%
Obwalden	49.08%	50.92%	67.36%
Schaffhausen	43.37%	56.63%	70.74%
Schwyz	53.36%	46.64%	63.59%
Solothurn	41.54%	58.46%	57.28%
St. Gallen	43.27%	56.73%	59.38%
Ticino	53.14%	46.86%	60.23%
Thurgau	44.35%	55.65%	57.23%
Uri	49.56%	50.44%	59.55%
Vaud	29.07%	70.93%	41.4 0 %
Valais	37.95%	62.05%	63.73%
train	39.64%	60.36%	65.20%
Zurich	34.26%	65.74%	59.78%
Swiss Confederation	38.29%	61.71%	59.47%

See also

• List of federal referendums

literature

• Fabian Schäfer: Will the people vote on the termination of the free movement agreement? Is there more immigration than before? The most important questions about the migration debate in the National Council . In: Neue Zürcher Zeitung . 16th September 2019.
• Petar Marjanović: Goodbye bilaterals? The 8 most important questions about the termination initiative . In: watson.ch . February 25, 2020.

Web links

• The initiative on Parliament's website
• Overview of the initiative on the Federal Chancellery website
• Popular initiative “For moderate immigration” on the website of the Federal Council (Swiss government)
• Website of the opposing non-partisan committee
• Website of the opposing SME committee

Individual evidence

1. ↑ Limitation Initiative - It started with the yes to the mass immigration initiative. In: SRF News. August 5, 2020, accessed August 25, 2020 . 
2. ↑ For moderate immigration (limitation initiative). Popular initiative. In: Swiss Parliament. Retrieved August 20, 2020 . 
3. ↑ ^{a b} Federal Chancellery: Provisional official result: Popular initiative "For moderate immigration (limitation initiative)". Retrieved September 27, 2020 . 
4. ^ Message on the popular initiative "For moderate immigration (limitation initiative)". P. 5028.
5. ↑ The cantons reject the limitation initiative (pdf). Conference of the Cantonal Governments September 27, 2019.
6. ↑ For moderate immigration (limitation initiative). Popular initiative. In: parlament.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
7. ↑ arguments. In: Committee for moderate immigration. Retrieved August 20, 2020 . 
8. ↑ Termination of the free movement of persons: Far-reaching negative effects. In: SME Committee “Dismissal Initiative - Destroy Jobs No”. Retrieved August 20, 2020 . 
9. ↑ Peter Spuhler: Limitation initiative is extreme and dangerous. In: Handelszeitung . March 7, 2020, accessed August 20, 2020 . 
10. ↑ An open labor market is an important pool of skilled workers for SMEs. In: SME Committee “Dismissal Initiative - Destroy Jobs No”. Retrieved August 20, 2020 . 
11. ↑ Prosperity through openness - bilateral path as a recipe for success. In: SME Committee “Dismissal Initiative - Destroy Jobs No”. Retrieved August 20, 2020 . 
12. ↑ No to the termination initiative. In: fdp.ch. November 6, 2019, accessed January 5, 2020 . 
13. ↑ For the bilateral path and against isolation. (PDF) In: bdp.info. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
14. ↑ Cancellation initiative. In: cvp.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
15. ↑ An open and networked Switzerland. In: grunliberale.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
16. ↑ 1st Extraordinary Assembly of Delegates 2019 in Weinfelden. In: evppev.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
17. ↑ Cancellation initiative. In: sp-ps.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
18. ↑ Cancellation initiative. In: gruene.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
19. ↑ Michael Wiesner: Clear no to the termination initiative. In: economiesuisse.ch. October 25, 2019, accessed January 5, 2020 . 
20. ↑ A no to the limitation initiative is a yes to the SMEs. In: Swiss Trade Association. Retrieved August 28, 2020 . 
21. ↑ Yes to the bilateral path - No to the termination initiative. In: berufgeber.ch. September 26, 2019, accessed January 5, 2020 . 
22. ↑ Selina Tribbia: A clear no to the limitation initiative ! In: syna.ch. September 10, 2019, accessed January 5, 2020 . 
23. ↑ NO to the anti-employee SVP initiative. In: unia.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
24. ↑ Swiss Federation of Trade Unions: Defending good jobs and wages - No to the SVP dismissal initiative. In: sgb.ch. February 24, 2020, accessed February 27, 2020 . 
25. ↑ The universities need the mobility of specialists and therefore reject the limitation initiative. In: swissuniversities.ch. September 12, 2019, accessed January 5, 2020 . 
26. ↑ ETH Board welcomes ERI message and underlines the importance of the European research programs. In: ethrat.ch. March 5, 2020, accessed March 6, 2020 . 
27. ↑ Limitation initiative: The VöV resolves the no-slogan. In: voev.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
28. ↑ Cancellation initiative. In: operation-libero.ch. Retrieved January 5, 2020 . 
29. ↑ Andri Rostetter: Yes to limit initiative, no to SVP: As the association Avenir 50 angry plus friend and foe. NZZ from August 26, 2020, accessed on August 27, 2020.
30. ↑ Stefan Häne: Ecopop helps SVP in the fight against immigration. Tagesanzeiger , 7 July 2020, accessed on 10 September 2020.
31. ↑ Stefan Häne et al .: A country goes to its limits. Der BUND, September 8, 2020, p. 9
32. ↑ Hansueli Schöchli: According to a new study, the free movement of people has reduced prosperity in Switzerland. NZZ from August 14, 2020, accessed on August 14, 2020.
33. ↑ Switzerland's growth is better than its reputation. Development of GDP per capita. economiesuisse, March 16, 2016, accessed on August 15, 2020 .  ( Full text .)
34. ↑ Hansueli Schöchli: The bilaterals bring Switzerland more prosperity - or is the opposite true? NZZ from August 19, 2020, p. 19.
35. ↑ No to the limitation initiative: Swiss universities are successful thanks to their networking. (PDF) In: Press release. swissuniversities, June 29, 2020, accessed on August 15, 2020 . 
36. ↑ Arena. SRF, June 5, 2020, accessed on June 8, 2020 (stream of the TV program). 
37. ↑ Denis von Burg & Pascal Tischhauser: Only with Brussels' blessing . Ed .: The Sunday newspaper. December 14, 2014.
38. ↑ Denis von Burg & Pascal Tischhauser: Blocher wants to go all out . Ed .: Sunday newspaper. 3rd July 2016.
39. ↑ The Federal Council: Coronavirus: A federal referendum will take place on September 27, 2020 . In: admin.ch . April 29, 2020, accessed April 29, 2020.
40. ↑ Template No. 631 - Provisional official result. Federal Chancellery, September 27, 2020, accessed on September 27, 2013 .