The right is accused of trickery to “increase rents”

National Socialist Councilor Jessica Jaccoud thinks that property owners want to increase rents with the “salami tactic”.Image: keystone

The people have not yet voted on subletting and facilitated termination as property owners are already preparing the next adaptations to lease law. The tenants’ associations are going wild and Guy Parmelin would have liked things to happen differently.

Stefan Bühler / ch media

Jessica Jaccoud denounces the “salami tactic”. According to her, property owners are “working to weaken tenant protection” by increasing the number of proposals on the subject.

The Vaud national socialist councilor points to several interventions filed in 2016 and 2017 concerning provisions relating to initial rent, the yield ceiling for rental housing, urgent personal use and subletting. For the lawyer, active within the tenants’ association Asloca, all these requests only concern one thing:

“That landlords can more easily increase rents”

Jessica Jaccoud, national socialist advisor

New changes of the right of lease

She supports her criticisms with the strategic approach of the opposing party. On November 24, Switzerland will vote on only two of the six initial proposals: easier application of property rights and new, stricter rules on subletting. But even before the people’s decision is known, the bourgeois majority in Parliament is already pushing forward the next proposals.

These are intended to ensure that initial rents can only be contested if the tenants were in a “situation of personal or family distress” at the time the contract was concluded. From the landlords’ point of view, this is “good faith in matters of tenancy rights”. The second intervention aims to more easily adapt rents to the usual level in the locality and neighborhood.

In August, a majority of the National Council’s legal committee already approved both requests, and on Thursday, November 7, it discussed two more reports on this subject. Parliament will probably debate it in spring 2025, and the tenants’ association has already threatened to launch a referendum as a preventative measure.

For national advisor Jessica Jaccoud:

“It is obvious that it is not legal security that interests landlords, as they claim in the voting campaign, but their profit”

An unjustified criticism

National advisor to the Center, Philipp Bregy rejects the criticism of the salami tactic. In his eyes, each of these interventions reacts “to real circumstances or to court decisions”. The aim is always to obtain “clear lease law”, because “clear also means fair”, according to this committee member of the Swiss Landowners Association (HEV).

The center’s national councilor Philipp Matthias Bregy believes that criticism of the salami tactic is “dishonest”.Image: keystone

Regarding the projects that will be put to the vote in November, Philipp Matthias Bregy affirms that “no new possibility of termination will be introduced”. Landlords would benefit from long-term leases. And to add:

“Changes of tenants are above all synonymous with expenses”

Regarding lease termination, the term “urgent” has been replaced by “current and important”, “which clarifies things”. The other conditions of extraordinary termination remain unchanged. “No new termination possibility has been introduced for subletting”specifies the Valais national councilor.

The Federal Council must say yes

Officially, the Federal Council says “yes” to the proposed reforms. He must, because Parliament’s “yes” obliges him to do so. In reality, the UDC federal councilor in charge of the file, Guy Parmelin, does not much appreciate the strategy used by the real estate owners’ lobby in Parliament. He has made this clear on several occasions.

Indeed, the Minister of Housing has long aspired to a global review of tenancy law, with a discussion process and a round table bringing together all the forces present. “It is not a question of examining only the question of rents,” said Guy Parmelin on June 1, 2021 at the National Council. And to continue:

“A much broader approach is needed. We must try to find balanced solutions that take into account the legitimate interests of different interest groups.”

That day, the National Council debated a motion for a complete review. The Council of States had unanimously transmitted it six months earlier. The Valais state councilor from the center Beat Rieder, a party colleague of Philipp Matthias Bregy, then pleaded in favor of a global reform:

“The revision of tenancy law is always an extremely delicate matter, because we indeed want a balanced, serious and fair tenancy law for both parties – landlords and tenants.”

Forced to act

State advisors were forced to act following a controversial ruling by the Federal Court in October 2019. As a reminder, the judges have now authorized the net return on rental housing to be, under certain conditions, 2% higher than the rate of reference interest, and no longer just 0.5% as was the case until then.

Stylish detail: This change in practice corresponded exactly to the request for one of the interventions in the arsenal of real estate owners, which had not yet been definitively addressed.

People rose up and tenant associations were outraged. Guy Parmelin, for his part, noted during the debate in the National Council:

“The judgment and the controversies which followed show that today, it is the courts and no longer the legislator who decide on the setting of rents. This is why we need open discussions on a comprehensive review.”

“Satisfaction with tenancy rights”

But in a memorable vote, the National Council very narrowly said no to the proposal of its colleagues in the Council of States: initially, the Council voted yes by 94 votes to 93. But then, the president of the National Council Andreas Aebi (UDC) noted

“The voting system did not work. We repeat the vote”

Andreas Aebi (UDC)

The new result: 96 yes against 97 no. The total revision was therefore no longer on the table.

And from the point of view of HEV representative Philipp Matthias Bregy, the situation has not changed:

“A total revision had and still has no chance”

Attempts in this direction have always failed. An extensive investigation by the Confederation also revealed “great general satisfaction with the right to lease”. The need for a complete revision has not been identified. This is why Parliament discusses “at irregular intervals specific adaptations of the tenancy law”, according to Philipp Matthias Bregy. For him, this is the “proper” path.

Apparently not for Guy Parmelin. His support – imposed on him by Parliament – in the current campaign for a double yes is lukewarm. Some say it borders on refusal to serve.