The Zurich-based political year begins unusually. The member of the Parliament processed the next Monday exclusively on parliamentary initiatives. With this policy Instrument, called the PI, can change the Parliament unpopular law article in your own expertise, without the need for a detour through governing Council and management.
The initiatives on the agenda for this meeting are a mix of different political concerns: The SP requires, for example, supplementary benefits for poor families, the SVP wants to introduce time limits for the evacuation of occupied houses, and the GLP would like a new free company founded by taxes.
The parliamentary Initiative, which is the easiest means to bring a subject on the Table.Claudio Schmid (SVP)
PI have been experiencing for some years a Boom. This shows an evaluation of all the member of the Parliament business since 1987, made by the TA. Until 2006, the Canton of enough councillors and Kantonsräte average of 10 PI per year, in the last twelve years, there were 24. Record of the year is 2018, with 44 parliamentary initiatives. Now, every fourth business is on the agenda for this meeting a PI. The result of the boom in a traffic jam in the Canton Parliament is Almost 40 PI waiting for a first consultation – as many as never before. In addition to more than a dozen PI, at which the final vote is pending.
engagement in government policy
but What makes this Instrument suddenly so attractive? “It is the most direct way in the government’s policy to intervene,” says Esther Guyer, group leader of the Greens. It therefore deems it to be valuable and indispensable. An estimate of the share of their colleagues. All Claudio Schmid (SVP).
no one has filed in the current legislative session more PI than Schmid. “It is the simplest means to bring a subject on the Table,” he says. It is the innate competence of Parliament to enact laws. This, it is important to use: “The cantonal Parliament must be strong. If we are to be a kind of spare tire for the government and administration, and only by waving what you put in front of us, we can get rid of us.”
Only 60 of the 180 in the Canton of councillors and Kantonsräte have to agree to a PI, to send you on the way. This hurdle is overcome, must advise a Canton Council’s Commission on the concerns. Only in the final vote, according to this advice, the business then needs a majority. Other policy instruments are in need of, however, from the start a majority (see Box).
“to leave Only the weakest and the strongest medium”
This feature was originally a concession to minorities in the Council, which received the PI a Chance to heave their concerns on the political Agenda and seriously consider. Today, the scheme, especially the largest group, comes in the Council of the SVP. She is a top horsewoman in the submitting PI. Overall, the party in the current legislative session 33 has to be made together – as many as FDP and SP. It’s not chance. The SVP has 55 seats in the cantonal Parliament, in order to transfer a PI, it needs only the five EDU-to get Kantonsräte into the boat. No other group can bring in easily their topics in the Ratsbetrieb. This ensures that other groups, for frown.
Everything must take place more quickly. Therefore, it takes a sledge hammer.Yvonne Bürgin, Raspräsidentin (CVP)
The PI is not only the longest lever in the hands of the Parliament, but also the one that causes the most work: “PI are insanely expensive,” says President Yvonne Bürgin (CVP). The Commission must listen to the first signatory, the draft advice, and may also interview employees of the administration. Bürgin criticized: in the past, Kantonsräte put the Instrument in a more conscious and only as a last resort. But the political style had changed: “Everything must go faster, everything needs to be loud. That is why you take the sledgehammer.”
Thomas Vogel, parliamentary leader of the FDP, put it this way: “I have the feeling that the councils need only requests, and parliamentary initiatives, i.e., the weakest and the strongest.” The TA-evaluation of the cantonal Parliament of shops based his impression: The number of requests increases, that of the postulates and Motions. The Problem from a bird’s point of view: Sometimes colleagues, had a rich half-baked proposals, which have a priori no Chance of a majority on the Council and serve only as a campaign vehicle. Green party leader Guyer evaluates the PI-flood as a vote of no confidence to the government.
salami tactics by Initiative
Similar to Beat Bloch (CSP) sees it. For him, another point to add is yet to come: He accuses the SVP to use the PI as a tool to unpopular laws by salami tactics. An example is the social policy: “As appetizers is called for tightening to tightening. And because it’s not always about individual concerns, the sound so bad, the SVP’s success.” You would require all the Changes as a concentrated load in one Motion, she wouldn’t be able to command a majority.” In the same category four parliamentary initiatives of the SVP-husband, Stefan Schmid, with whom he wants to tighten the four paragraphs in the naturalization law.
Martin is Prettier, leader of the SVP, defends himself against this criticism. The PI-flood from the house of SVP was by no means due to a specific tactic: “We take the concerns of our electorate and try to implement them.” If you have as a party already have an idea of how a particular Clause should be amended, it would be the Honest thing to to call the. The four initiatives of Stefan Schmid, on the same subject he finds to be legitimate: “So may comment of a member of the Parliament to any single idea.”
Claudio Schmid can not understand the objections of the other parties. He has used the PI, in order to increase his own notoriety, admits Schmid. Also, the fact that he holds the Ratsbetrieb “on your toes”, he argues. But if the success of the voice, was the legitimate one. He says: “I would welcome it if other groups would more often attack.”
reform ideas
tabled many parliamentary initiatives threaten in such a way to overwhelm the Ratsbetrieb and the commissions. Because they are submitted only once, PI may no longer be withdrawn, even if the Commission turns out that you have a chance.
Perhaps, but that will change in the future: The cantonal Parliament act is currently being revised in total. The Zurich Parliament must decide on two minority amendments that would change the System significantly. FDP, greens, EPP, AL, BDP and EDU will allow for parliamentary initiatives, which are only formulated as a suggestion. Today, only a write request is admissible. This would make the PI even more attractive. SP and SVP reject the. “Anyone who submits a PI should be able to say which law he wants to change,” said SP parliamentary leader Markus Späth.
A second application of the same six groups provides a two-stage procedure. The idea is that PI will only be fully developed if they have a majority in the Council. The PI achieved 60 votes, but less than 90, a Commission, a pre-test and submit them to finally once again to the Council.
No protection against poorly-thought-out initiatives
SP-group chief Markus Späth supported this idea. You would have the advantage that chance lots of initiatives would be intercepted before the machinery starts. SVP-group chief Pretty, however, considers it “The strap is an unnecessary Addition, the PI will be examined in the Commission anyway.”
it is Clear, however, that Even such a two-stage procedure does not protect against poorly thought-out PI. This can be seen in two initiatives of the FDP and SVP, which have been transferred with a clear majority on the Council, and to amend the protection against violence act. Both were quashed by the Commission, unanimously, not even the representatives of the two applicant parties supported it. The last word on the 21. January, the member of the Parliament. A Yes is as good as impossible.
(Tages-Anzeiger)
Created: 02.01.2019, 19:15 PM
