Voting recommendations for the vote of 27 September 2026

YES to the Neutrality Initiative

Martin Hartmann

The Libertarian Party believes that the much-cited “flexible neutrality” is a wrong turn. We do not want to give our politicians any leeway to “flexibly” turn us into a party to a war and drag us into wars.

State action is bound by the law, and that is what Federal Councillors such as Ignazio Cassis (FDP) forget when they now want to redefine neutrality. Their activist, interventionist interpretation of neutrality breaks with the principle of non-interference that has been the basis of our foreign policy for centuries.

“Keep still” was the lesson the Swiss drew hundreds of years ago from the disastrous defeat at Marignano. Switzerland's contribution to peace does not lie in armed military action abroad, but in mediation and diplomacy. The precondition for this is credible neutrality.

Cassis's fraternising with Zelensky, for example at a Ukraine summit without Russia on the Bürgenstock, has done lasting damage to the credibility of Swiss neutrality, in the eyes of both the USA and Russia. That is why the Neutrality Initiative is necessary: we must remind those in power what Swiss neutrality stands for – the logical consequence of the non-aggression principle applied to foreign policy. One should not use violence against others.

We do not want to sacrifice our children to the war activism of the EU elites. That is why we also oppose the EU sanctions against Russia that Switzerland is supposed to adopt. Free trade is the best safeguard of peace. Those who are economically intertwined do not go to war with each other.

Moreover, sanctions are usually decided undemocratically, by a handful of officials in Brussels or Bern, and act as a collective punishment of the population of the countries concerned rather than of those actually responsible.

They also violate fundamental property rights: when the state tells entrepreneurs to whom they may sell their products, or confiscates the assets of sanctioned persons, it encroaches on the property of individuals – regardless of whether one shares their political views. This is exemplified by the Swiss intelligence officer Jacques Baud, who is to be sanctioned for his dissenting opinion on the war in Ukraine.

Switzerland has no business in a military alliance such as NATO. It is more valuable as a mediator between the fronts.

NO to the Food Initiative

Andreas Puccio

When you read the text of the initiative, the usual phrases immediately catch your eye. The Confederation and the cantons “ensure” this and that, the Confederation “creates the conditions” and “aims for”. For any liberal, that alone should settle the recommendation. For the sake of completeness, we will nevertheless briefly address the content. Food security is of course important. But the way to achieve it is not through efforts to change the population's eating habits or to steer farms towards particular forms of production. What is produced and consumed should be decided by producers and consumers, and certainly not by politics.

Votes in the canton of Zurich

NO to the amendment of the Teaching Staff Act

Andreas Puccio

The proposed amendment increases public spending, leading to additional costs of around 83 million francs a year. In line with our positions, we are in favour of promoting free choice of school, organisational freedom, decentralisation and alternative school models, rather than inflating the centrally organised state education system even further. It should also be noted that the workload of teaching staff has increased not least because of the heavy bureaucratisation of schools, so that teachers are often busy with many things other than actual teaching. The state itself would be in a position to make cuts here and reduce the burden.

NO to the amendment of the Patients Act and the Health Act

Andreas Puccio

The proposed amendment is a counter-proposal to the initiative “Self-determination at the end of life, including in retirement and nursing homes”. While the Libertarian Party naturally recognises the right to self-determination at the end of life too, the proposal goes further, because it also affects private institutions. Individual self-determination does not, however, imply that private parties may be obliged to tolerate assisted suicides on their premises. Freedom must rather apply to both sides – to residents and to private institutions alike.