Hot as it was on 1. August 2007. As early as 10 o’clock in the morning, the convoy of the audience, on the castle hill in the Canton of Aargau, Lenzburg flocked sweat. The then foreign Minister, Micheline Calmy-Rey, held in the shady courtyard of the mansion and her first speech of the day.
Actually, anyone interested but. It was crucial to what followed later. The SP-Magistratin took a hike to the Rütli, and wanted to set an example. This, after it had come in the previous years, to desert scenes on the mystical Meadow. Right-wing radicals had disrupted the Celebration.
Alone of their political instincts to do the Right thing, marched from Seelisberg UR, the alleged birthplace of the Confederation. My job as a newly minted policy Reporter on that summer day: I was allowed to accompany the Genevan on the “Grütli”, as the French-speaking Swiss call the spots on the lake of URI. Almost twelve years later, I tap this week, my last article for the Sunday views.
In the fast-moving politics is an eternity! Initiatives have been accepted by the people, surprisingly, other less surprisingly bulky discarded, important issues remain unresolved, parties to, lost again, parliamentarians and members came and went, one of them made even the re-election.
in The end, it all Courant normal. But as a longtime observer, a development I personally am a big worry: It is the encompassing the alleged lack of any Alternative in governance. Each new project is sold to the people, as there is only a single correct solution.
“There is no alternative”, is the slogan. The Slogan goes back to Margaret Thatcher (1925-2013). The former British Prime Minister had called the Tina-principle – Tina, for “There is no alternative” (there is no Alternative) – the policy introduced.
The Iron Lady, a fanatical supporter of radical market capitalism, used the Slogan to their positions through boxes. Resistance came up, she repeated like a mantra their demands for deregulation and the pushing Back of the state. In a reproachful tone, There is no alternative to append: “.” Forty years later, the Tina-principle ruled in the Swiss policy. Equipped with always professional operating rods and so-called Spin Doctors (spin doctors) political leaders, associations and lobby groups in this country, of all the pages of your positions as the supposedly only alternative. Criticism is not weggelächelt rarely easy, ask at the end of as ignorant and incompetent.
This leads to hardened fronts and a climate that is detrimental to the democratic discourse. The best example is the framework agreement is currently certainly. The a side is this Deal with the EU as a completely inevitable step that solves all the problems of our country in the European policy, little will change and, therefore, under all circumstances needs to be signed. The opponent is not entblöden on the other hand, the destruction of the Switzerland of invoking, if the Confederation says the agreement Yes.
How can there be any intelligent debate on the most important of all the questions possible? The question of the relationship of Switzerland to its neighbours. However, not only in foreign policy, it seems to always go to everything. The Same is also true in the areas of migration, energy, transport and other policy areas.
The Problem is that These extreme attitudes is the fact that the room for manoeuvre of our country is much larger, as each is pretending to deny it. We take the in recent years, often negotiated asylum theme: of Course, this rich Nation could be much more generous in what concerns those in need of Protection. You should also want to – if the population, and quite in accordance with their obligations under international law – be more strict and less people shelter grant.
Or in the case of environmental issues: the state could set itself the goal of becoming radical on ecological economies, for example, in the promotion of public transport versus the car. However, it can promote, when the people want it, also the private transport. The political will is huge – regardless of what is suggested by many decision-makers.
The Tina-principle, damages the credibility and creates political apathy. It would be time that one of the most respectable features of the Swiss policy – the capacity for dialogue and Compromise – would again come to the fore. As it makes Calmy-Rey, twelve years ago, with your gear on the Rütli. Instead of confrontation and right to listen to any price: to each other and to seek dialogue. So at the end, the best Argument can win.
With this article, policy-Editor, Marcel or Matt (50) to be adopted from Sunday. It is composed of Communication, head of the Zurich health Directorate councillor Natalie Rickli (42, SVP).1800 article has Marcel or Matt in the last twelve years for the SoBli. Every single Text testifies to Odermatts special gift for the readers to convey the complex policy clearly. No other Journalist reported alive from the Federal house, whose protagonists are so human and all too human look. We would like to thank you for his commitment and wish him well for the future only the Best! Gieri Cavelty, editor-in-chief