"FDP, Centre and SP Are Betraying the Country": Swiss Parties Clash Over EU Treaty Package

The debate over Switzerland's treaty package with the European Union has moved from parliament to the television studio, and the tone is anything but diplomatic. In Friday's edition of the SRF programme "Arena", Magdalena Martullo-Blocher, vice-president of the Swiss People's Party, accused the FDP, the Centre Party and the Social Democrats of "betraying the country."

The discussion followed a decision this week by the Council of States — the upper house of parliament — that the treaty package requires a double majority of both the people and the cantons. The National Council is expected to debate the matter in the winter session. The "Arena" guests offered a preview of what that debate will look like.

SP vice-president Jon Pult opened the discussion by arguing that the question of whether a cantonal majority is required is ultimately a legal matter. He said the constitution does not prescribe a double majority in this case, since the package neither involves joining a defence alliance nor joining a supranational community. "I would simply argue that with Bilateral III, we should proceed exactly as we did with Bilateral I and II," said the National Council member from Graubünden. Otherwise, he said, the rules are being changed mid-game.

For Martullo-Blocher, the stakes are existential. She argued that the treaty package would deeply intervene in Switzerland's structures, pointing to what she called the "automatic adoption of law" it would entail. "We have only one goal: that the people can decide in Switzerland, and not in Brussels." For this reason, she said, it was clear the treaty package also required the double majority.

FDP National Council member Beat Walti corrected the terminology. He said "automatic adoption of law" was the wrong term — it was rather a "dynamic adoption of law." "When the EU adapts the basis of our treaties, we are obliged to sit down at the table and negotiate an update of these treaties," he said. That also gave Switzerland repeated opportunities to weigh the advantages and disadvantages of any change.

Centre Party Council of States member Andrea Gmür agreed. She also noted that if Switzerland disagreed with a change, there was the option of launching a referendum and voting on it. She said she did not find all the contents of the treaty package good, but added: "Ultimately, it comes down to whether we want market access or not." Especially in geopolitically dangerous times, she said, it was urgent for Switzerland to have regulated relations with its closest partners.

Marco Sieber, a member of the organisation Kompass Europa, pushed back. He argued that market access was not actually at stake — it would not improve with Bilateral III. The entrepreneur saw one main effect: "The EU is the world champion of bureaucracy and has lost touch, and we want to hitch ourselves to it."

For now, the Council of States has decided the rules of the game. The National Council will have its say in December. And the Swiss people, if the referendum is held, will have the final word. The SVP is already framing the vote as a choice between Swiss democracy and Brussels bureaucracy. The other parties are framing it as a choice between regulated relations and isolation. Both sides agree on one thing: this is a decision that will shape Switzerland for decades.

Written by Thomas Nussbaumer thomas.nussbaumer@alpineweekly.com