[ad_1]
Switzerland is in the middle of the second crown wave. However, unlike the first, the political clock is ticking. In less than a month, the Swiss electorate must cast two federal votes at the polls. One of them is the corporate responsibility initiative.
Much work for moderator Brotz
Everything revolves around the question of whether a Swiss company should be held responsible if one of its foreign subsidiaries poisons a river or lets children work. Swiss companies must respect international human rights and environmental standards, regardless of where they occur in the world, which is why the initiators demand it.
Public debate takes place on an emotional level, and even in the SRF “arena” people barely held back on admonishing index fingers, swearing, and accusations. SRF “Arena” host Sandro Brotz had a lot to do with his guests.
Minister of Justice seems exhausted
The first thing he does is approach Federal Councilor Karin Keller-Sutter. With a poster of a Saint Bernard dog biting its tail, the concerns of the starters are belittled, hence Brotz’s accusation. “On the contrary,” replied the Minister of Justice somewhat exhausted: “We do not vote if you are for or against human rights.” The problem is the radical nature of the initiative.
In addition to accountability, the initiative also requires due diligence as a first step. It’s expensive and time consuming to check, Keller-Sutter said. “I recently spoke with the CEO of a company that makes pharmaceuticals. A due diligence check with more than 10,000 suppliers would cost him a million francs a year. “
Moderator Brotz starts the next debate
This statement takes Daniel Jositsch, SP Council of States and supporter of the corporate responsibility initiative out of the reserve. “The initiative is very clearly related to companies controlled by Swiss companies. Reviewed! This does not include providers, ”the Federal Councilor throws curled up at his feet.
Before Keller-Sutter and Jositsch have finished arguing, host Brotz lights the next fire. Appears: The economic umbrella organization Economiesuisse against Operation Libero. The two unequal allies, who have often made common cause in past referendum battles to substantiate SVP initiatives, are suddenly no longer so casual.
“Operation Libero has become Operation Radical. It is fading, ”says Economiesuisse director Monika Rühl, poisoning co-chair Laura Zimmermann. Rühl fights for the counterproposal. This stipulates that companies must report annually if environmental and human rights standards are also being met abroad. Unlike the initiative, it does not want to sanction, unless the company has deliberately falsified the report. Then you can threaten a fine of 100,000 francs.
No school exercise: the carpenter rumbles
In the usual style of the teachers’ monologue, Zimmermann nullifies the counterproposal announced by Rühl so vehemently in a few sentences that Rühl quickly exclaims “Such Hafechäs”. This is not a school exercise here, this is about real grievances, a good report is of no use, Zimmermann rumors. “Anyone who is against this initiative is essentially against compliance with international human rights standards.”
BDP-Landolt talks about a win-win situation
Change of scenery: they should be solemnly embraced and make plans for the new center. Instead, they cross the sheets: CVP President Gerhard Pfister and BDP President Martin Landolt. The Swiss economy is no more important to him than a child in a cotton field, says Pfister in response to Brotz’s provocative question. The president of CVP says:
Martin Landolt has a completely different opinion. “The initiative would even help Swiss companies. If Swiss companies meet international standards abroad, their reputation and credibility increase. “This is a win-win situation for the economy, the National Glarus Council said with confidence.
Regardless of whether the Minister of Justice versus the law professor, Economiesuisse versus Operation Libero, or the dispute in the middle: The discussion turned again and again to what Switzerland is so proud of: small and medium-sized businesses, the affectionately known “SMEs” .
Keller-Sutter Warning
What happens to SMEs if the initiative is accepted? Does Due Diligence Increase Your Effort? Can these also be held responsible? “Only in exceptional cases” is what the proponents say. The exact provisions must then be stipulated in law, and the “bourgeois parliament” can be trusted that an initiative “will certainly not be interpreted more strictly than the initiators originally demanded.” However, Federal Councilor Keller-Sutter cautions that the administrative effort for smaller businesses would be enormous. “Especially in the cocoa or coffee industry, it is difficult for small businesses to track everything.”
With so many SMEs and always being careful to give opponents and supporters exactly the same amount of time to speak, it is difficult for moderator Brotz to come to a conclusion. Laura Zimmermann gets the last word from the back row: “It is simply not too much to ask that victims of human rights violations have the opportunity to take legal action in Switzerland for their rights.” And before anyone else can react, Brotz disconnects and thanks his guests for the lively discussion in the “Arena” studio, which is once again empty of the public.
