[ad_1]
The St. Gallen government does not support the additional restrictions on public and private life that the federal government is planning. There is a threat of “oversteer with fatal consequences for society and the economy,” wrote St. Gallen in his statement to Bern. At this time, the federal government should “renounce the far-reaching measures or, consequently, proclaim the extraordinary situation.”
St. Gallen football fans on October 4 before the game against Servette: It is questionable whether 10,000 people will be allowed in on Sunday against FC Basel.
No, not like this, or at least not right now. The government’s rejection of the federal government is clear and unequivocal: it rejects the additional crown measures proposed by the Federal Office of Public Health (FOPH) for people and facilities and public access companies, as well as events. In his statement before the Conference of Health Directors (GDK) chaired by the councilor of the Basel government, Lukas Engelberger, he considers that the “massively strict” restrictions are “unacceptable”, as stated in Sunday’s letter.
The president of the district of St. Gallen and the chief of health Bruno Damann at a previous press conference on the measures of the cantonal crown.
Regional President and Health Director Bruno Damann had called the St. Gallen government to a meeting on Sunday because he did not want to listen to the cantons on their own, as he said. The Sanktgalliers, the reference to Asterix & Obelix is allowed, they go their own way: as is well known, the canton, unlike Bern, Basel-Stadt and others, continues to allow large events with up to 10,000 people at the moment.
“Rapid escalation makes implementation difficult”
Like the federal government and many other cantons, St. Gallen introduced and implemented new restrictions on public and private space last week due to the sharp increase in the number of cases, the Damann government explains its resistance. At the same time, it had prepared measures to increase the capacity of beds in hospitals and increase protection for particularly vulnerable people in nursing homes. “Due to this initial situation, we currently consider a renewed and significant tightening of measures to restrict public and private life justifiable,” the government writes.
“The rapid escalation of the measures makes their application difficult and calls into question the credibility of official actions.”
Furthermore, “the effect of the measures already taken cannot yet be adequately assessed.” There is “the risk of oversteer with fatal consequences for society and the economy.”
If the above measures do not have a sufficient effect, the canton of St. Gallen also believes that “other specific measures are indicated” which have already been prepared by the canton. “Another massive slowdown in almost all areas of life is associated with an enormously high expenditure of resources, with corresponding economic, social and also health consequences for the people affected,” the statement literally says. “The basic principle should be that all activities that can be carried out safely and respecting the rules of distance and hygiene should remain allowed at all times.” This is not possible with the proposed measures.
“Despite the tense epidemiological situation, they are too extensive and, therefore, disproportionate.”
Federal measures required an extraordinary situation
The government of St. Gallen affirms that the federal government must proclaim the extraordinary situation in order to take the proposed measures. In his opinion, the measures envisaged for the entire country “are not covered by the jurisdiction determination of the Epidemic Law due to their scope and interference.” Therefore, the cantons would be “annulled” with a different assessment of the situation and would still have to “bear the responsibility and costs of monitoring these measures.” Or to put it another way: “This leads to a blurring of the federal distribution of powers and therefore also represents a clear violation of the principle of fiscal equivalence.”
The clear conclusion of the government of St. Gallen:
“We ask the federal government to refrain from enacting the proposed far-reaching measures or, consequently, to proclaim the extraordinary situation.”
Only with a corresponding decree in accordance with the Federal Epidemic Law would it also be clear that “the Confederation is responsible for the social and macroeconomic consequences of these decisions and that it adequately shares the costs incurred”.
Finally, the government of St. Gallen criticizes the fact that the cantons “are not directly invited to the audience by the federal government, despite the great social and political importance of the issue.” They would not have the opportunity to make a direct statement, but their response “will only be incorporated into a consolidated statement from the conference of specialist directors.” Therefore, the St. Gallen government will send its declaration to the GDK at the same time to the federal government. What other cantons should welcome, as initial reactions show.
