Thomas Aeschi confirms his candidacy for the Federal Council and his interest in asylum

Thomas Aeschi confirmed that he wished to succeed Guy Parmelin to the Federal Council. In an interview resumed on 8 November by several media, the head of the UDC parliamentary group said he had the necessary skills and said he was ready to take over asylum. This statement confirms his availability, but does not guarantee him the nomination of his party or the department currently headed by Beat Jans. [S1] [S4] [S5]

A confirmed application, a selection still open

Thomas Aeschi was appointed by the Zugian section of the UDC at the end of October and reserved a time for reflection. He explained that he wanted to discuss with his family, friends, members of his parliamentary group and representatives of other parties. Asked by Blick about a possible strategy behind this expectation, he assures that he made his own decision and made it clear that he did not discuss it with Christoph Blocher. [S4] [S5]

The 47-year-old National Councillor put forward fifteen years in Parliament and nine years as Chair of the UDC Group. He had already tried to join the Federal Council in 2015, when Guy Parmelin was preferred to him. Time, RTS and Blick document the same confirmation of application: their stories converge, while relying largely on the candidate's statements to the SonntagsBlick, rather than on independent confirmations of his qualifications. [S1] [S4] [S5]

The selection of candidates officially supported by the UDC is expected on 20 November, after the selection committee hearings. According to the RTS, eight people are running for office: Thomas Aeschi, Céline Amaudruz, Pierre Alain Schnegg, Franz Ruppen, Michael Graber, Marco Chiesa, Jean-Pierre Gallati and Rémy Wyssmann. The parliamentary election was announced for 9 December. The two Houses of Parliament, not the electors directly, elect the members of the government. [S4] [S6]

Asylum as a priority, without guaranteed portfolio

Thomas Aeschi says he wants to focus on domestic politics. It considers that the problems of asylum and migration remain significant and reports the discontent of cantons that do not feel sufficiently heard. These assessments are those of the candidate: the interview does not provide a list of cantons or data to measure their scope. Nor does it contain a set of new measures which could be assessed for costs, effects on the persons concerned or guarantees of redress. [S5]

The formulation of Time, which evokes its desire to replace Beat Jans with Justice, must be read with the precision brought about by the interview: Thomas Aeschi says he is open to all departments. His interest in the Federal Department of Justice and Police is therefore not presented as a condition for his entry into government. He ran for the seat left by Guy Parmelin in the college, not the federal councillor of Beat Jans. [S1] [S4] [S5]

The distinction has a concrete scope: after the election, the Federal Council meets in its new composition to decide on the allocation of departments. An elected candidate therefore does not choose his or her portfolio alone. The function also requires the abandonment of its professional activity and its possible mandates, including on boards of directors. Access to government implies specific responsibilities and incompatibilities beyond the political preferences displayed. [S7]

Sovereignty and Compromise

In Blick, Thomas Aeschi places sovereignty, direct democracy and federalism at the centre of his argument. He defended less immigration and his opposition to rising taxes and taxes, while seeking good relations with other countries. These positions illuminate his priorities; they are not sufficient to establish the consequences of the election for taxpayers, cantons or persons subject to asylum. [S5]

On relations with the European Union, it calls the package of agreements a "monster treaty". Time, however, adds: in an interview with Schweiz heute, the candidate states that, as a federal councillor, he would fulfill his mission of providing objective information to the public on these agreements. The partisan criticism and commitment to government responsibility are two separate registers of his speech. [S1]

Blick also asked about his lack of experience in an executive and his ability to overcome parliamentary confrontations. Thomas Aeschi replied that he knew how to support compromises, citing work on military financing. This ability remains his candidate argument, not a consensus established by the interview. The next steps will make it possible to distinguish three still open decisions: the official support of the UDC, the choice of Parliament and, in the event of an election, the allocation of a department by the college. [S4] [S5] [S7]