The session of the big chunks: suddenly reforms are possible

Swiss politics cannot be reformed. This lament has been heard often in recent years, and for good reason. At times it seemed that progress could not be made in areas such as pensions and health care. Parliament partially paralyzed itself and in the end the electorate often said no.

In the spring session, which ended on Friday, Parliament discussed and adopted a number of important issues. On the one hand, there was a practical reason for this. There will be elections in the autumn and the Federal Assembly wants to clear the air about as many large parts of the legislature as possible that is coming to an end.

At the same time, there was a clear will to clear the reform backlog. In some cases amazing compromises were possible, for example in the revision of the sex criminal law. The Council of States came up with a formulation that adheres to the principle “No is no”, but comes so close to “Only yes is yes” that even feminists are satisfied.

The template hasn’t been definitively cleaned up yet, but there should be hardly anything in the way of a majority-appropriate solution. In other areas, there is at least an intact chance of surviving a possible referendum. An overview of some of the most important documents on the agenda in the spring session:

For a long time, the occupational pension reform (BVG) seemed to be on the brink of collapse. In the end, it was approved by comfortable majorities by the National Council and the Council of States. She is not dry, because the SP and the unions are holding the referendum. For them, the reform of the pension fund in the central areas does not go far enough.

This concerns both the compensation for the reduction in the conversion rate, which calculates the amount of the pension, and the improvements for people on low incomes. This point shows the structural weaknesses of the BVG. It is designed to supplement the AHV, which means that low earners can build up little or no pension capital.

Now the relevant thresholds have been lowered, but this raises new opposition. Because employers must pay at least the same amount to the pension fund as their employees, low-wage sectors (agriculture, hospitality and cleaning, sales) are confronted with substantial additional costs. This causes great annoyance.

In a joint statement by reform advocates, farmers’ and trade associations are “conspicuous” by their absence. If they reject the bill, there will be an “unholy alliance” in the referendum. This will not take place until 2024, presumably together with the citizens’ initiative for a 13th AHV pension. The left is happy about that.

For twelve hours on three session days, the National Council discussed the monster bill Federal Law for a Secure Power Supply with Renewable Energies, also known as the General Decree. At the end of the day, the balance can be taken: the template is on the right track, but two controversial points can still cause it to fail.

The National Council refrained from allowing the use of renewable energy sources in biotopes of national importance. In view of the approaching winter crisis, the Council of States took the plunge on this point last autumn. However, he decided to relax the residual water regulation for hydropower.

This caused disgust among environmental organizations, while the SVP is bothered by the solar obligation for new construction. Federal Councilor Albert Rösti, who bravely fought in the monster debate, warned in vain in both cases. However, the resolutions are not set in stone and can be corrected as deliberations progress.

Parliament could use Simonetta Sommaruga’s round table as a basis for hydropower and delegate the solar energy obligation to the cantons. In any case, the approval procedures and fees are more important for the expansion of renewable energy. Parliament has set the course on both counts.

Healthcare costs have been rising almost uncontrollably for years, and with them healthcare premiums. They put pressure on the budget of more and more families. Now, after the National Council, the Council of States also wants to enshrine the cost and quality objectives in health care in law, as a counter-proposal to the center party’s cost control initiative.

The question is whether the desired effect will occur. The powerful and financially strong players in the healthcare sector have always found a way to torpedo savings decisions. And effective measures if the cost targets are not met have been abolished by parliament. This could give an impulse to the SP’s waiver initiative.

The National Council maintains an indirect counter-proposal that provides for an extension of the premium discounts. However, the Council of States did not want to discuss this in the winter session of last year for fear of the costs for the cantons. If he sticks to it, the counterproposal is done. And the SP initiative must get good chances with the voters.

It’s been a tragedy for years. When it comes to childcare outside the family, Switzerland is at the bottom of the international rankings. The main reason is the expensive nurseries. The National Council has therefore passed a bill providing for federal subsidies of more than 700 million francs.

Finance Minister Karin Keller-Sutter had spoken out against the proposal because of imminent shortages. Ultimately in vain, but the counter-financing left the National Council open. The SP brought revenue from the OECD minimum tax into play – although it voted against the vote on June 18 to introduce it.

The spring meeting reached its most emotional moment in the middle of the week, when the National Council rejected a motion to relax the War Material Act on the very point that would have allowed third countries to transfer Swiss weapons to Ukraine. It was the result of minor bickering between the FDP and SP.

But the last word has not yet been spoken. A compromise from the Security Committee of the National Council is on the table. It could form the basis for a solution, because the pressure from abroad is increasing, according to the interview with US ambassador Scott Miller in the NZZ. But that takes time, which Ukraine doesn’t actually have.