Parliament wants to spend more on agriculture than the Federal Council
Published: Thursday, Dec 7th 2023, 15:40
Back to Live Feed
Parliament wants to spend significantly more on agriculture in 2024 than proposed by the Federal Council. The National Council has agreed with the Council of States on this point. However, it wants to make savings on regional policy. It will not conclude its deliberations on the budget until Monday.
On Thursday, the large chamber made decisions on direct payments and the promotion of business locations in rural regions. However, the National Council has not yet decided anything on other financially important issues, such as military spending or federal contributions to public transport in the regions.
Dispute over victim symmetry
The most significant financial aspect is that the National Council, like the Council of States, wants to leave the funds for direct payments at the current year's level - around CHF 2.8 billion.
Compared to the Federal Council's proposal, this means additional expenditure of CHF 54.8 million. The national government wanted to apply the cross-sectional cuts it had decided on across all areas with the exception of the army to direct payments as well.
A minority of the National Council's Finance Committee (FK-N) called in vain for the Federal Council to follow suit. "It is understandable that the symmetry of victims must also affect agriculture," said Claudia Friedl (SP/SG).
Lars Guggisberg (SVP/BE) disagreed, saying that cuts in direct payments have a direct impact on the wages of farming families. "Farming families in mountain regions will be hit hardest," warned Markus Ritter (center/SG), President of the Farmers' Association.
Like the Council of States, the National Council also voted in favor of further additional expenditure in the area of agriculture. Among other things, this involves promoting the sale of Swiss wine, protecting livestock and promoting sugar beet production. In total, the additional expenditure excluding direct payments amounts to CHF 19.2 million according to the National Council and CHF 17.2 million according to the Council of States.
In contrast, the National Council was more cautious than the small chamber when it came to regional policy. Unlike the Council of States, it does not want to make a new contribution of CHF 25 million to the corresponding fund this year.
No permanent surveillance of the Federal Palace
The National Council also decided to make cuts compared to the Federal Council's proposal in the Confederation's own area. It refused to allocate an additional million to improve the protection of the parliament building at night and at weekends.
The upper chamber also cut the global budget of the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) by CHF 1.8 million. In line with the Council of States, it also decided that current expenditure for the Federal Supreme Court and the Federal Administrative Court should increase less than budgeted in 2023.
On Tuesday, the Council of States approved a budget with a structural deficit of over CHF 66 million - which is not actually permitted under the debt brake. To ensure that the legal requirements can still be met, the small chamber subsequently decided on a credit freeze. This is an instruction to the Federal Council not to utilize the approved credits.
As far as the National Council's deliberations are concerned, it is not yet possible to draw a corresponding balance. One of the decisive factors will probably be whether the National Council, like the Council of States, approves federal funding of CHF 55 million for regional passenger transport.
"We must be ashamed"
The detailed debate in the National Council was preceded by a fundamental discussion on financial policy: the SP and the Greens blamed the additional expenditure on the army decided by Parliament for the Confederation's difficult budgetary situation.
"Arming the army, feeding agriculture, cutting social welfare: what kind of signal is that? What kind of country is this? I think we should be ashamed of ourselves," said Felix Wettstein (SO) for the Green parliamentary group.
SVP parliamentary group spokesman Guggisberg accused the other parties of an "unrestrained and irresponsible" spending policy. In recent years, parliament had been spending ever more on social welfare and development policy. In contrast, agriculture and national defense had been neglected.
The FDP and the Center Party also called for spending discipline. Parliament must learn to set priorities in the budget, said Martin Bäumle (ZH) on behalf of the GLP parliamentary group. This was not primarily about cuts, but about curbing expenditure growth more strongly.
Discussion of the budget will continue on Monday.
©Keystone/SDA
English 
German 
French 
Spanish 
Arabic