City Councilor Simone Brander should quickly get away from activism

During the election campaign, the social democrat launched bold attacks on the car and attracted attention with absurd climate ideas. Now there are good reasons for her to take up her new post as head of civil engineering.

Simone Brander (third from right) is happy about her entry into the city council in mid-February. Now it is clear which department will take over.

Annick Ramp

The city of Zurich has a new ruler of the streets. And what a. With Simone Brander, a resolute car critic and bicycle activist becomes the new head of the important civil engineering department – even though she doesn’t ride a bicycle in the city herself. It was “too dangerous” for her, she emphasized during the election campaign.

Now Brander has to deliver. She is the first Social Democrat to hold the post in 14 years. And the expectations of the cycling lobby are enormous. Before her election, she sharply criticized the authorities for doing too little for the two-wheelers and making progress too slowly. Now she herself will come under pressure, because experience has shown that the speed is always too slow for the Zurich Velo-Turbos, and they are only satisfied when there are no more cars navigating the streets of Zurich.

Brander will soon realize that in transport policy it is easier to demand something loudly than to implement it afterwards. Her direct predecessors – AL left winger Richard Wolff and FDP man Filippo Leutenegger – had to gnaw at that. The street space in Zurich is limited, numerous interests collide, and overriding laws and regulations must be observed.

It is to be hoped that Brander will quickly shed the activist robe that she put on during the election campaign. In a climate paper that she wrote together with two Juso, she seriously called for a ban on petrol cars in the city from 2030, an immediate ban on gas heating and air-conditioning shops in the districts, which should be equipped with food subsidized by the city. They are unworldly, illiberal proposals that will hopefully gather dust in a drawer somewhere and never see the light of day again.

Brander also took part in an illegal bike demonstration before her election. For this she was convicted in the first instance. Of course, as a city councilwoman, she can no longer afford such unspeakable actions.

But even a controversial politician like Brander deserves a serious chance to prove herself in executive office. With reference to other examples, there is real hope that it will become a part of the nine-member city council. On the one hand because of the power of the factual: bike routes don’t develop overnight, “Zurich car-free” is an unrealistic, legally untenable dream, and the mobility needs of the people of Zurich and the many newcomers will not decrease, but rather increase.

On the other hand, there are political arguments: Brander’s party, the SP, is the big loser in the past parliamentary elections. The powerful party, which has recently attracted attention with ever more extreme demands, lost six seats in the municipal council. Apparently, the voters don’t appreciate politics that are too radical – not even in the red-green city of Zurich.

In addition to the Greens, who fell short of expectations, the Green Liberals, the Center and the FDP won the elections. The latter three set more reasonable accents in transport policy. Unlike the Greens, they are not fundamentally opposed to car traffic – in future it should simply do without combustion engines as far as possible.

Brander and her SP should now orient themselves to the strengthened, undogmatic forces and not to the narrow-minded two-wheeler fundis. This also applies to the question of parking spaces: the radical dismantling of the blue zone in the neighborhoods, which has been promoted in recent years, is not well received by large parts of the left-wing electorate.

Quiet hopes exist. The designated head of civil engineering, Brander, said on Wednesday that she naturally wanted to work with the canton on traffic issues. You can only move forward with “joint solutions”. That no longer sounds quite as combative and absolute as it did before the elections. After all.

source site-111