Could Swiss vote spur a rethink on EU barriers to migration?

Much of Europe has been weighing ways to reduce so-called welfare tourism from poorer EU nations. Switzerland's support for quotas on EU migrants may spur a new debate on labor mobility.

|
Thomas Hodel/Reuters
Swiss Interior Minister Alain Berset, Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga, and President and Foreign Minister Didier Burkhalter attend a news conference Monday regarding results of a referendum on reintroducing immigration quotas.

The European Union has bristled at the Swiss decision to end the free flow of Europeans coming to work in their country.

The EU fears the vote, which came down in a narrowly won referendum Sunday, complicates the relationship between the bloc and Switzerland, which is not a member state but has signed many treaties adopting EU policy. More broadly, European loyalists also fear that it reflects growing euroskepticism and could, in turn, boost anti-immigrant parties.

But could the political currents in Switzerland carry the Europe debate in a different direction and cause Europeans to think twice about curbs on migration?

Freedom of movement vis-à-vis so-called welfare tourism has been the topic du jour, since several European countries ended labor restrictions for Bulgarians and Romanians on Jan. 1. It has caused politicians from Britain to Germany to the Netherlands to question whether open-door policies are straining public services.

All EU citizens have the right to work anywhere within the 28-member bloc. This freedom is cherished by many Europeans, most of whom could also work freely in Switzerland under previous policies.  

So this referendum certainly resonates with more people than “welfare tourism.” After all, it’s easier for policymakers and thought leaders to relate to a middle-class European – or even a chief executive, academic, or scientist – barred from Switzerland than to a poor Roma family recently arrived in Germany.

“We are all affected.… This is not welfare migration, but real work migration, which is the core idea of European integration. It goes to the hearts of many people, theoretically,” says Klaus Zimmermann, the director of the Institute for the Study of Labor in Bonn, Germany.

But he is more doubtful about whether this could give the defenders of EU integration the upper hand, because there is still the risk that the welfare tourism debate will balloon into a larger one about labor migration.

“The danger with the welfare migration debate is that it’s not so much about welfare migration, but there is a danger that it’s misused to debate labor mobility. That’s what we see now” in Switzerland, says Dr. Zimmermann. “Other countries might say, if Switzerland, such a rich country, feels threatened, we should feel threatened, too.”

In fact, far-right groups across Europe swiftly hailed the Swiss referendum result. And Toni Brunner, chairman of the far-right Swiss People’s Party, the group that promoted the referendum, proclaimed to the Neue Nurcher newspaper: “Switzerland is playing the role of a pioneer for the whole of Europe now.”

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.
Real news can be honest, hopeful, credible, constructive.
What is the Monitor difference? Tackling the tough headlines – with humanity. Listening to sources – with respect. Seeing the story that others are missing by reporting what so often gets overlooked: the values that connect us. That’s Monitor reporting – news that changes how you see the world.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.

QR Code to Could Swiss vote spur a rethink on EU barriers to migration?
Read this article in
https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Europe/2014/0211/Could-Swiss-vote-spur-a-rethink-on-EU-barriers-to-migration
QR Code to Subscription page
Start your subscription today
https://www.csmonitor.com/subscribe