The health insurance premiums should rise less sharply. With this goal in mind, the National Council approved an indirect counter-proposal to the “cost-cutting initiative” of the Mitte party. Specifically, the Federal Council should set cost and quality targets. The middle also said yes to the counter-proposal. Center President Gerhard Pfister says in an interview what that means for the initiative.
SRF News: If the counter-proposal stays the same, will you withdraw your initiative?
Gerhard Pfister: We’ll see when the counter-proposal has passed the Council of States. The lobbyists worked very hard today, but they were unsuccessful. We’ll wait and see how successful they are in the Council of States.
You criticized in Parliament that lobbyists use the “Healthcare” self-service shop. But members of your parliamentary group are diligently involved themselves: Many have paid mandates, for example from health insurance companies.
Yes, and I expect the members of my group to vote in favor of the party here. That they put the interests of the population ahead of the interests of their mandate – and that’s what they did today.
Of the eight middle group members in the health commissions, seven have mandates in the health sector – some very important ones. Can they really decide independently?
Today they have it. And I also expect the councils of states to decide in favor of the population and not in favor of their mandates.
We have a problem in the healthcare system with the great influence of lobbyists, with mandates.
It is also in their own interest that healthcare costs go down.
Today you would have done it, you say – and otherwise?
We have a problem in the healthcare system with the great influence of lobbyists, with mandates. That is why this initiative is urgently needed, because it somewhat breaks up this deadlock on mutual interests.
Your initiative doesn’t prescribe anything. She just says that something needs to be done if costs rise too much. But not what.
What you have to do has been known for a long time. Only nobody does it. There is the Diener report, which lists forty measures that could be taken to reduce costs.
Everyone says you have to save, but not with us, only with the others. Nothing happens like that.
Hardly any of them have been implemented. And our initiative only wants you to implement what you already know.
Then why didn’t you launch a popular initiative – with this content?
Because then the lobbyists and their opposing interests would have offset each other again. This is one of the biggest problems in the health sector: Everyone says you have to save, but not with us, only with the others. Nothing happens like that.
Why should this be different with your initiative? The Federal Council would have to make proposals. The same mechanisms then play a role in Parliament.
We have already stabbed a wasp’s nest with this initiative.
Yes, but a concrete proposal is already included in the counter-proposal. Namely the cost targets. Everyone fought back. It is therefore correct that it was written in.
Your own initiative was probably also about addressing the dissatisfaction with the rising health insurance premiums before the elections without poking a hornet’s nest with concrete measures?
We have already stabbed a wasp’s nest with this initiative. Everyone fought back. Everyone said there wasn’t even a need for a counter-proposal. We still reached him. We do not shy away from this discussion. You know exactly what needs to be done. What matters is that we may have come a step closer to that today.
Nathalie Christen conducted the interview.