Left party wants to push traffic turnaround after referendum on highway expansion
Published: Sunday, Nov 24th 2024, 18:40
Back to Live Feed
After the narrow referendum on the expansion of the highway, interpretations of the vote differ. The winning camp now wants more money for public transport and cycle paths. For the losers, the congestion problem remains unsolved - and a selective expansion is not off the table.
The Greens wrote on Sunday that the planned highway expansion was excessive, outdated and overpriced. "Today heralds a turnaround in transportation in Switzerland," said Lisa Mazzone, President of the Green Party.
Mineral oil tax for climate protection
Her predecessor Balthasar Glättli followed up a little later on Platform X with a concrete proposal. The Zurich National Councillor called for the funds freed up by the referendum to be used for climate protection.
The SP took the same line. The party wrote that the No to the highway expansion was a clear commitment by the electorate to more climate protection and public transport.
The environmental organization Umverkehr called for a moratorium on the construction of motorways. The money originally earmarked for highway expansion should now be invested in climate-friendly mobility.
More federal money for cycle paths
Pro Velo Schweiz also called for the focus to be placed on safe cycle paths. The federal government should make a greater financial commitment in this area.
The environmental organization Greenpeace stated that the result was received with enormous relief. It spoke of an encouraging sign for the development of sustainable mobility with the inclusion of all means of transport.
The Green Liberals echoed similar sentiments: "The way is now clear to organize our mobility with smart and more environmentally friendly solutions," said Zurich National Councillor Barbara Schaffner in a press release.
Costs in the billions
The tenor on the proponents' side was completely different. The problem has only been postponed, wrote the "Yes to safeguarding the motorways" committee. Congestion and avoidance traffic continue to cost the economy and society billions every year. There is still an urgent need for action.
The Yes campaign was supported by the Swiss Trade Association (SGV), the automobile associations TCS and ACS, the business umbrella organization Economiesuisse and the commercial vehicle association Astag, among others.
Individual templates instead of a package solution
Auto-Schweiz, the association of car importers, was also part of the alliance. It called for the elimination of bottlenecks in the highway network to be tackled with individual proposals in future following the rejection of the package approach.
The projects contained in the bill must now be revised, wrote the Swiss Association of Master Builders, also part of the Yes committee.
The two camps also disagreed on the reasons for the outcome of the vote. In the view of David Raedler, Co-President of the Swiss Transport Club (VCS), the opponents prevailed with the argument that higher capacities would not solve the problem of congestion in the long term.
Yes camp divided over reasons
The referendum was also a sign against excessive immigration, said Aargau SVP National Councillor Benjamin Giezendanner to Swiss television SRF. During the referendum campaign, he repeatedly heard that people did not want more and more traffic.
However, Giezendanner does not see the decision as a vote in favor of climate protection. Even the decarbonization of private transport, i.e. the switch from combustion engines to electric drives, will not solve the problem of the many hours of traffic jams.
By contrast, Fabio Regazzi, a member of the Ticino parliament, identified a mobilization problem on the part of the supporters: "We had difficulties. Only a few cantons were affected. It was not so easy to convince people in the other cantons." Regazzi is also President of the Swiss Trade Association (SGV) and in this role was Co-President of the Yes Committee.
©Keystone/SDA
English 
German 
French 
Spanish 
Arabic