Parliament’s no to CS loans has no consequences

In mid-April, the National Council twice rejected the urgent commitment credits in favor of the Swiss National Bank (SNB) and UBS in the extraordinary session. The deal was done and there was talk of a “reprimand” to the Federal Council. However, a discussion broke out afterwards as to whether the no had an impact on the obligations of the federal government.

The Federal Council has now exchanged views on the result at its meeting on Wednesday, as the Finance Department (FDF) announced. And he emphasizes again that the decision has “no legal effect”. The reason: Both obligations were already binding with the enactment of the emergency regulation. Parliament also discussed the loans under this premise. In order to make the commitment, the Federal Council only needed the prior approval of the finance delegation – which it also received.

The Federal Council and the Secretariat of the Finance Commissions base their legal assessment on the analysis of the materials on the Financial Budget Act, as it is also stated. The Federal Office of Justice also shares this view.

Federal Council appeals to Parliament

For the state government it is clear that without these obligations “the takeover of Credit Suisse by UBS and thus the stabilization of the financial center” would not have been possible. Due to the extraordinary circumstances and the high degree of urgency, the assurances given to the SNB and UBS were necessary “to avert a financial crisis and the serious damage it would cause to the Swiss economy”.

If a no by Parliament meant that the Federal Council would have to cancel commitments that had already been made, this would “significantly impair” the Federal Council’s ability to act in times of crisis, he pointed out. This in turn would also contradict the will of Parliament, which it introduced in 2010 when the procedure was revised.

Federal Council wants to take Parliament’s position into account

However, the state government wants to take Parliament’s position into account in its future work and decisions. She is thinking, for example, of the negotiations with UBS about the guarantee agreement – but only insofar as this does not endanger the takeover of CS by UBS and thus “the stabilization achieved”.

The Federal Council also intends to take Parliament’s opinion into account in the work involved in coming to terms with the events and in fulfilling the postulates. The question should also be examined as to whether Parliament is appropriately involved in urgent financial decisions or whether there is a need for adjustment. The restriction: The constitutional powers of the federal government and thus the state’s ability to act in times of crisis must not be curtailed. (abi)