Now Mitte’s Bürgin settles the score with the SVP and says what must follow

No time? blue News summarizes for you

• The SVP’s 10-million-person initiative was clearly rejected on voting Sunday.
• Centrist National Council member Bürgin calls for better management of population growth in the future—focusing on quality rather than quantity.
• The SVP is engaging in symbolic politics, she says, and must now get on board with concrete solutions.

Summary created with

Shortly before 2:30 p.m., it was clear even to the last skeptics: The SVP initiative, which aimed to introduce a population cap, was decisively rejected. Under a bright blue sky, representatives of the center-right parties watched the referendum from the Schanze in Bern, which offers a perfect view of the Federal Palace.

Among them: Zurich National Councilor Yvonne Bürgin. She is the faction leader of the Center Party and was particularly delighted by the public’s rejection of the 10-million-cap initiative. She answered questions from blue News.

Ms. Bürgin, you confessed to me shortly before the interview that you’d already had a spritzer. Is this really a day to celebrate—or shouldn’t we be putting some brainpower into the question: How can we prevent another referendum Sunday like this from happening again?

Today we can celebrate briefly, definitely. The result doesn’t put an end to the debate—it’s only just beginning. This is a mandate for politics and business: We need to better manage population growth. The Center Party has always said that we take the public’s concerns seriously. Things are going well in Switzerland, but economic growth has led to growing pains. We must now address this problem—and for that, we need answers.

All results at a glance

Here's how your community voted

I assure you: Representatives from every party have told me today that we must take the public’s concerns seriously. How will you do that specifically—for example, next week? And what lessons will you draw for a debate on the 13th AHV pension, where the public also has a clear opinion?

Regarding the “10-million-Switzerland” initiative, I can say this: The Center already engaged intensively with potential solutions within the parliamentary group back in January. We submitted a whole package of legislative proposals. We want to hold the economy accountable. It should not grow in breadth, but in depth. Increase value creation per capita, not just the number of people: qualitative rather than quantitative growth. We’re curious to see how this goes. SVP Federal Councilor Guy Parmelin naturally rejects this.

Higher payroll deductions, more expensive shopping

Calculator shows: This is how much you would pay for the 13th AHV pension

We hope that the right wing will now also support our motions. Regarding public transportation, we want to improve the situation during peak hours—we’ve submitted many proposals on that front. We truly want to improve things in this country because the current state of affairs is painful, and we need solutions.

The SVP has regularly put this issue to a vote for years. Do you feel that with this policy—which sounds a bit vague today on voting Sunday—such an initiative can be prevented once again? Or would the party bring it up again anyway?

In my view, the SVP engages in symbolic politics rather than substantive politics. I hope that we can now take responsibility together. You’ve lumped the issues of asylum and labor migration together. On asylum, the center has already extended a hand—we’ve co-sponsored various motions because we, too, say: Something needs to happen. Genuine refugees should be allowed to come. We, too, do not want economic migrants or criminal foreigners in Switzerland. Now I hope that the SVP, for its part, will extend a hand so that we can work together to curb labor migration—which accounts for the largest share of population growth.

Video on the vote