Less money for asylum assistance: Parliament uses this trick to bypass the debt brake

class=”sc-cffd1e67-0 fmXrkB”>

How can the debt brake be complied with?, many politicians wondered last December during the budget discussion.

Parliament did not want to take anything away from the farmers and also wanted to increase expenditure on national defense in the coming years. Given the weak economy, the debt brake enables a budget deficit; a deficit of up to 497 million would be allowed. That is why the politicians in Bern decided to cut back on asylum seekers.

Parliament has cut 30 million francs in social assistance for asylum seekers and temporarily admitted people and refugees compared to the Federal Council’s request. The decision during the budget discussion was taken with 130 votes in favor, 64 against and one abstention.

Cantons are not involved

The problem: the parliamentarians in Bern cannot change or reduce these contributions at will. It is the cantons that pay out the money. And the federal government must transfer an agreed amount for each person cared for – discount or not.

And the cantons are not considering paying less to refugees and asylum seekers because of the latest decision. Gaby Szöllösy (57), Secretary General of the Conference of Cantonal Social Directors, confirmed to Blick that these are tied costs and that the federal government is obliged to pay them in full to the cantons based on an agreed global flat rate.

SP claims symbolic politics

However, the SEM still has almost 1.1 billion francs available this year for social assistance in the asylum system. Even after Parliament’s decision, current practice will not change: “The aim is to achieve these savings in social assistance on the basis of better labor integration,” Reto Kormann, spokesperson for the SEM, told Blick.

There are therefore no plans to reduce the reimbursement of social assistance costs to the cantons. “This would not generate any real savings, but simply lead to an unwanted shift in costs to the detriment of the cantons,” Kormann said. The cantons would probably revolt against this.

“This decision was extremely dubious financial policy,” SP financial politician Sarah Wyss (35) also criticized parliament. It was purely a matter of ‘symbolic politics’. If the budgeted money for emergency asylum aid is not enough, an additional loan is needed, says Wyss.

The example shows how the debt brake in parliament can easily be circumvented and only apparently adhered to, she says – which ultimately reduces the debt brake to absurdity.

Source:Blick