Farmers fear revenge please

class=”sc-3778e872-0 cKDKQr”>

The SVP cannot count on the farmers on June 18. Last week, the farmers’ organization voted yes to the law to protect the climate. Due to “the major impact on agriculture from climate change”, the proposal was supported, the association said.

Bitter for the largest party in the country. The peasants and the SVP, usually they are one heart and one soul. But climate protection divides the otherwise inseparable. Already at the CO₂law two years ago, the farmers’ organization opposed the SVP and recommended adoption. Better again.

“The profession is completely divided”

“Our profession is completely divided,” says Alois Huber (60). De Aargauer is a farmer and SVP National Councilor – and therefore knows exactly what he is talking about. Like all SVP members, he himself rejects the law, but admits: “We farmers already feel the consequences of global warming much more than many others. I am also aware that we need to use our resources differently.”

His colleague from the National Council Priska Wismer-Felder (52) is partly responsible for the fact that the farmers finally waved the yes slogan. The politician from the center of Lucerne campaigned for the climate protection law in front of the Agricultural Chamber, the parliament of the farmers’ association. “From a farmer’s point of view, you can’t reject the law,” she says.

Farmers stay out of voting campaigns

She convinced the French-speaking Swiss representatives and the women in the room. They were the decisive factor in the fact that the farmers’ association finally chose the yes slogan – and not votes. But the Lucerne section of Wismer-Felder also voted yes – a canton that is not exactly a haven for progressives.

Boerenbond chairman Markus Ritter (56) would have preferred the vote to be released. If there’s one thing the chief farmer doesn’t want, it’s a divided peasantry. He has therefore ensured that the farmers’ union remains outside the referendum campaign. “Half a year before the federal elections, I don’t want us farmers tearing each other apart,” he explains. Wismer-Felder regrets that. “It’s a missed opportunity,” she says.

Fear of the tit-for-tat

One reason to keep quiet is the SVP. The concern: party representatives could retaliate against farmers for the lack of support in this referendum campaign. That fear is not unfounded, says SVP national councilor Martin Haab (60), chairman of the Zurich Farmers Union, who decided to say no: “There are many who think that way.”

Parliament will soon vote on the Federal Council’s proposal to reduce the agricultural budget for economic reasons. Farmers will receive two percent less direct payments next year – that would be a minus of 75 million. “Until now, the SVP has always supported the farmers. Given the last decision, I’m not so sure whether it will stay that way,” Haab fears.

SVP, the farmer friends?

His Aargauer party and colleague Alois Huber also considers a tit-for-tat possible. “One or the other will remember.” This can be deadly for the farmers. A fear that Markus Ritter does not share.

Conversely, without the support of the powerful farmers’ union, the SVP must fear not only defeat in the vote, but also its reputation as a party close to the farmers. Even if SVP chairman Marco Chiesa (48) emphasizes that this is still the case, the climate issue shows that this is only partly true.

Source:Blick