What the parliamentary debate on the budget reveals about Switzerland

The decision taken during the session which should most delight the Swiss abroad concerns electronic identity. This will be introduced in 2026. Both houses of Parliament have adopted it. For the diaspora, the e-ID should facilitate relations with the authorities and possibly also with banks.

The Council of States also took an important decision regarding e-collecting, i.e. the digital collection of signatures for popular initiatives and referendums.

E-collecting became a priority after the outbreak of the false signature affair last September. Commercial companies are suspected of having falsified initials on a large scale, during collections carried out for referendums or initiatives. The Council of States (Upper House) expects e-collecting to provide a reliable collection and verification process.

Plus

More participation for Swiss abroad

For the Swiss abroad, collecting electronic signatures would also make it possible to participate in the process of developing initiatives and referendums.

Center MP Elisabeth Schneider-Schneiter recently emphasized that this possibility of participation has so far been restricted for the diaspora. The National Council (Lower House), however, has yet to make a decision.

Observers assume that the introduction of e-collecting would make the collection of signatures faster and easier. This could lead to an increase or even an influx of popular initiatives.

Political analyst Mark Balsiger told SRFExternal link on this subject: “Popular initiatives could thus become even more popular”. Such reflections will be taken into account in the remainder of the debates.

The battle over the budget

The discussion on the budget looked difficult from the start: almost everyone wanted more money for the army, but only in principle. In detail, many things remained controversial.

One thing is clear to everyone: Switzerland must save elsewhere to cover the additional expenses. But where and how? There are as many opinions as there are seats under the Federal Dome.

The situation is all the more difficult as the two chambers are not on the same wavelength regarding savings proposals. At the start of the session, some commentators even considered the possibility that Parliament would fail to find common ground and that Switzerland would have to start the year without a budget.

The debates on this subject were therefore more complicated than they appeared, even if Switzerland is doing relatively well, at least without debts inherited from the past thanks to the strict debt brake.

In Germany, the government collapsed over the budget. In France, the 2025 budget has still not been accepted by the National Assembly. And in the United States, debt service swallows up the sum of the entire Swiss state budget.

The glory hour of parliamentary work

From a technical point of view, the adoption of the state budget in Switzerland is a game of ping-pong between the two Houses until they agree.

The first debate took place in the National Council. It was noisy, virulent, the camps were irreconcilably opposed and sometimes threw barbs at each other.

It was then the turn of the Council of States. The way he approached the debate can be described as the session’s glory hour. The Upper House provided a perfect example of the good old politics of compromise, without spectacle, which focuses on content.

Its finance committee first looked at the National Council’s proposals. Then she went before the Council of States with a single, finely balanced reduction proposal. Given the initial situation, this constitutes a real tour de force.

“Not everything fits, but enough things fit”

Glarus senator Matthias Zopfi presented the idea of ​​the commission. At that moment, you could hear the flies flying, the room was so focused.

“This is perhaps the most important subject of the session. And yes, we have a responsibility. First, we need a budget. Second, we must approach the equipment of our army with fairness and realism, with circumspection. So far, I have the impression that Parliament is painting a rather sad picture. It’s up to you whether you want to continue this or whether we will now slowly move into solution mode.

The finance committee offers you a comprehensive solution to the problem. Integral means: not everything fits me, but enough things fit that it makes sense. I know the temptation is great to vote now in each area for what suits us best personally. For me too, this temptation is great, but I tell you: resist!”

At that time, the 40-year-old elected environmentalist from the canton of Glarus put back on track a budgetary discussion which had gotten out of hand and had become highly polarized.

State Councilor Mathias Zopfi speaks with representatives of the PS.

Keystone / Anthony Anex

Army: what to do with all this money?

Indeed, the Council of States then rejected all existing individual proposals and voted en bloc for the concept of its commission.

He thus gave a strong signal that the National Council could not ignore either. From there, the remaining differences between the two Houses became surmountable.

Ultimately, the National Council, dominated by the right, largely won. The army receives 530 million francs more. Despite the fact that even bourgeois MPs wondered how so much money could be spent wisely in a single year.

On the other hand, development aid is reduced by around 100 million francs, while agriculture is spared by the savings.

The limits of solidarity

Cuts in development cooperation were the subject of particularly heated discussions.

The Minister of Foreign Affairs, Ignazio Cassis, tried in vain to oppose it using strong words: “Faced with the ring of fire at the gates of our continent and the numerous arsonists, we need both the fire protection and firefighters, and we must not pit the two against each other.

By firefighters, Ignazio Cassis meant humanitarian aid, and by protection against fires, development aid.

Ultimately, the Swiss Parliament’s budget sends a simple message to the rest of the world: Switzerland’s solidarity has limits.

Indeed, Parliament also decided to restrict the protection status S for people coming from Ukraine. In the future, only people from war zones in Ukraine will get this status.

Federal Councilor Ignazio Cassis speaks with his Liberal-Radical Party colleague Damian Müller.

Keystone / Anthony Anex

The UN migration pact without Switzerland

Both Chambers have also buried the UN pact on migration. This defines measures aimed at regulating cross-border migration. Switzerland had nevertheless participated in its development.

It was also in vain that Ignazio Cassis described this instrument as useful for managing migratory flows. The bourgeois majority feared that a yes to the pact would lead to pressure on Switzerland.

Among the other decisions of the winter session which found wide resonance were the support measures for the Swiss steel industry in crisis, the criminalization of harassment and the abolition of the Swiss Patrol in its current form.

Finally, Parliament decided to ban the terrorist organization Hamas. The same should apply to the Shiite movement Hezbollah, if the Council of States validates the decision of the National Council.

Text reread and verified by Marc Leutenegger and Samuel Jaberg, translated from German by Katy Romy