The SVP promises us chaos if we reject its initiative and the opponents promise us chaos if we accept it. “20 minutes” shows you what we’re talking about.
It has become a sea serpent: on September 27, the Swiss people will once again vote on their immigration and their relations with Europe. After 2014 and the accepted initiative “against mass immigration”, the SVP is relaunching a ballot by simply reversing the terms. This time it will be “for moderate immigration”.
Goodbye free movement
However, the content is changing. This time, it is neither more nor less than the abolition of the free movement agreement that is requested. The consequences of this termination are, of course, very different depending on the camps and points of view. For the SVP, which launches the initiative, there will only be good things: Switzerland will be able to control its immigration and prevent the country from soon having 10 million inhabitants. For the party, controlling demographic growth in this way will have definite economic advantages, but will also make Switzerland safer and, to top it all, more respectful of its environment.
For opponents of the text, on the other hand, dark years will befall the country. The “guillotine clause”, the famous threat that hangs over our heads with each vote on Europe, is clear: if the free movement agreement is denounced, all bilateral agreements fall. And thus degrading our relations with our best neighbors, with whom Switzerland does so much business, that would be rather annoying and everyone would have to lose.
“Threat”, “burden” …
In the words of the Federal Council, the initiative is “a threat to jobs and prosperity, at a time when we face great economic uncertainties”. In those of the SVP, mass immigration is, conversely, “an enormous burden on the environment, the job market, social insurance and infrastructure”.
In detail, if the text is accepted, Switzerland will have one year to negotiate the termination of the free movement contract with Europe. If no agreement is reached, the Federal Council will have to “unilaterally” denounce the agreement. The “bilateral route” or the “autonomous route”, the stake is up to the challenge. Unless they read in a crystal ball, the Swiss can only speculate on the future and choose whether they want to continue on the current path or take the risk of embarking on a new path.