[ad_1]
“Explanation”
The National Council wants to open up and is putting pressure on the Federal Council: What exactly does that mean now? Seven questions and answers
With 97 to 90 votes, the National Council approved a statement Wednesday morning calling on the Federal Council to open. But does this have to act now? The most important questions and answers about this extraordinary process.
Narrow yes for explanation
It is a great note of protest: on Wednesday morning, the National Council approved a declaration asking the Federal Council to open restaurants, gyms and cultural establishments as of March 22. The rule of five should drop immediately; Testing and vaccination must be intensified. The protest note is just a test of strength with the parking brake on. In particular, the bourgeois FDP and SVP parties want to go further, but have little chance of success.
The climax of the efforts of the FDP and the SVP was last Friday: a majority of the national economic commission announced that it wanted to present a fait accompli to the Federal Council. You want to write in the law immediately that the opening must be on March 22nd. However, the proposal has a bad chance because the center party is divided: some support the rigorous attempt to pressure the state government, others want gentle pressure, just the statement that has been made now.
With 97 to 90 votes, the result was tight: while the SP and the Greens were closed and the GLP was largely against, there were about a handful of national councilors in the CVP and the FDP who abstained or voted in against. SVP and FDP were in favor. The most important questions:
The National Council approved the declaration. What does this mean?
Above all, it exerts pressure on the Federal Council. The National Council wants an immediate change of strategy towards more tests, more vaccines and more vacancies. For the moment, however, the explanation is inconsequential. The Federal Council does not have to adhere to it. Ignoring the statement entirely would be an affront to Parliament. In December, the National Council had already approved a statement asking the Federal Council not to impose stricter measures in ski areas. This lawsuit was successful.
Why did Parliament come up with this solution?
It is an interim solution presented by Martin Landolt (GL). This should keep the pressure high, but at the same time the Federal Council should be able to decide on the necessary measures on a daily basis. This would not be possible if the March 22 opening date became law.
Glarus core member Martin Landolt wants to keep the pressure on the Federal Council, but does not want to write an opening date in the law. (File image)
Can Parliament force open?
Yes, it could. And the majority of the Economic Commission of the National Council also wants this. He would like to write in the law that the Federal Council must open on March 22. The Council of States, which will discuss the law on Thursday, has so far done nothing to do so. In the National Council, the majority of the media should speak against it. Therefore, the SP accuses the bourgeois parties of having fanned the hopes of those affected by the action, with no prospect of success.
Why did the national councils want to take a radical step?
The resentment in parliament is great, especially in the business wing. By weighing the economic and health damage, which can vary according to the measures, they now want to limit the economic damage. Risk groups will soon be vaccinated, they say. “You cannot overcome a crisis without taking the affected people out,” said Martin Landolt, a member of the National Central Council. But people no longer understand the measures: shops or terraces are closed, although the risk of contagion is low there. The national councilor of the SP, Prisca Birrer-Heimo, on the other hand, says that it is “politically irresponsible if the Federal Council has a limited scope to react flexibly and quickly to new developments.”
What is the Federal Council doing now?
According to the Federal Council, the next opening step will take place on March 22. But what exactly is planned is not yet known. It is possible, for example, to open the restaurant terraces. It was leaked on Sunday that the Federal Council is examining larger openings than previously known, such as concerts or theatrical events. However, the Federal Council has previously established clear values regarding the R-value or incidence figures. Additional opening steps should only be carried out if observed. The criteria are not currently met.
What is the point of the explanation?
It is a signal, not only for the Federal Council, but also for Parliament’s limited scope for action. Currently, the Federal Council is making far-reaching decisions based on the Epidemic Law. Parliament cannot comment, or only afterwards. Statements or letters to the Federal Council are currently instruments that Parliament intends to use to give a voice. They are not particularly effective. The State Political Commission is examining plans to improve Parliament’s current lack of voice in future crises.
