In Switzerland, authorities, economic circles, social partners and main parties expressed their relief on Sunday June 14 after the rejection, by more than 54% of voters, of the anti-immigration initiative carried by the radical right, which aimed to cap the population of the Alpine country.
“With their decision today, citizens have given a signal of stability, openness and reliability,” declared the Swiss Minister of Justice and Police, Beat Jans, at a press conference, after announcing the result.
In the polls preceding the vote, the no was given slightly winning for this initiative, the adoption of which could have compromised relations between Switzerland and the European Union, its main trading partner, with which it maintains close economic ties despite its non-membership of the EU.
Supported by the Democratic Union of the Center (UDC, radical right), the country’s leading party, this initiative, in a Switzerland where foreigners represent more than a quarter of the population, aimed to limit immigration in order to prevent the permanent resident population from exceeding 10 million inhabitants by 2050 while the country currently has 9.5 million.
The proposal was also rejected by a majority of cantons, with the highest scores in favor of no having been recorded in Basel-City (73.48%), Neuchâtel (67.26%) and Geneva (65.42%).
“By rejecting the SVP initiative, the Swiss population has said no to withdrawal and xenophobia. This no expresses the clear refusal of a return to dark times, marked by the status of seasonal workers and the deprivation of rights for certain people,” reacted the Swiss Trade Union Union.
High participation
“It’s a disappointing Sunday for us, but also for all of Switzerland,” despite broad support in rural areas, declared the head of the SVP, Marcel Dettling.
The initiative was opposed by the government, Parliament, the main parties, unions and employers. The Greens said they were “relieved by the clear rejection of the SVP’s chaos initiative”. “I am reassured. This initiative put into practice a scapegoat policy,” declared Benoît Gaillard, Socialist MP, on television.
The vote recorded a high turnout, close to 59%, significantly higher than the average of around 49% observed in recent years.
Beyond the question of immigration policy, Switzerland’s European policy was also partly at stake. If the threshold of 10 million had been exceeded before 2050, Switzerland would have had to terminate the free movement agreement with the EU within two years, and other bilateral agreements relating to asylum and security would also fall.
Shortage of housing, rising rents, concreting of the landscape, traffic jams, crowded trains, increase in crime, exhausted health system and decline in the quality of education are the main arguments of the promoters of this initiative.
“Conflict of conscience”
Thomas Aeschi, head of the UDC group in Parliament, insists: 45% yes, “this is a very strong message” which shows that “a very large part of the Swiss population does not want immigration as we know it today to continue,” he said.
While welcoming the rejection of the initiative, the employers’ organization economiesuisse judged that “it is also clear that immigration concerns the population”.
In a separate referendum, the Swiss accepted a tightening of the conditions of access to civil service, defended by the government in a context of strengthening military capacities in Europe. The left opposed it, believing that this reform ultimately threatened the very existence of this alternative to military service.
Switzerland imposes compulsory military service on men under a militia system. Since the relaxation in 2009 of the conditions of access to civil service for conscientious objectors, their number has increased significantly, a development considered problematic by the government.
