What and who are the arguments against the Inclusion Initiative?

Question

I am currently finding out more about the Inclusion Initiative, which was officially adopted on 5 September 2024. Can you tell me who opposed the initiative and what arguments they put forward?

As a social work professional, I naturally support the Inclusion Initiative. It is in line with my professional code of ethics – in particular the principle of self-determination and the commitment to social justice. Implementing the initiative would make social workers’ jobs easier and more effective, as they would be better able to support people with disabilities in exercising their self-determination. It also promotes a society-wide shift towards greater inclusion.

Margot Vogel Campanello · Accepted Answer

Dear Ms …

The Inclusion Initiative calls for the legal and practical equality of people with disabilities and people without disabilities in all areas of life. This means that people with disabilities can claim the right to reasonable adjustments and support measures, provided these are necessary and proportionate to achieving equality. The aim is self-determined participation in social life.

In view of the global erosion of minority rights and current national and cantonal debates – for example, on inclusive schooling – your engagement with this issue seems to me more necessary than ever.

The Federal Council’s position and the current counter-proposal

On 20 December 2024, the Federal Council recommended rejecting the initiative. Whilst it supports the core objective, it does not see any concrete improvements for people with disabilities in the proposed form. Instead, it considers targeted legislative amendments to be more effective and has therefore announced an indirect counter-proposal.

This consists of two parts:

a Framework Act on Inclusion focusing on the area of housing.
a partial revision of the Disability Insurance Act with adjustments in the areas of assistive devices and assistance allowances.

The detailed explanatory memorandum and the counter-proposal can be found under the heading: The Federal Council is drawing up an indirect counter-proposal to the Inclusion Initiative (Link).

Parliamentary motions on the further development of the IFEG

As early as 18 January 2024, the Social Security and Health Committee tabled a motion – for details, see Curia Vista 24.3003 (Link). It calls on the Federal Council to revise the Federal Act on Institutions for the Integration of Disabled Persons (IFEG) so that people with disabilities can choose their form of accommodation and place of residence freely and independently – including the necessary support. A minority of the committee moved to reject the motion.

On 20 March 2025, National Councillor Christian Lohr also tabled an interpellation – for details, see Curia Vista 25.3192 (Link). His criticism: The counter-proposal and motion focus one-sidedly on the area of housing. The IFEG is outdated, he argues, as it is too supply-oriented and too heavily focused on property financing, and therefore no longer complies with the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities.

He calls on the Federal Council to clarify:

how the areas of work and education will be taken into account in the implementation of the motion,
whether the planned Framework Act on Inclusion will replace the IFEG as the framework legislation for promoting the inclusion of people with disabilities, and
if so, how the Federal Council will ensure that the areas of work and education are incorporated into the Inclusion Framework Act.

Further information

There is therefore a great deal happening on the political stage at present. You can follow the progress of the parliamentary debate via Parliament’s business database Curia Vista (Link). You can also find further arguments on the initiative committee’s website (Link).

Is this information sufficient for now?

Kind regards

Margot Vogel