Immigration debate: Mixing everything up paints a distorted picture

Immigration is not the same as immigration

In the current debate, figures are mixed up, added up or used in an inappropriate context. This leads to false conclusions. A prominent example is the consideration of immigration as a whole in order to derive statements regarding individual species or regions of origin. The suggestion is made: Only every second immigration is for gainful employment - the rest are primarily a burden on taxpayers. This distorted picture is problematic for several reasons:

• Switzerland has different control systems and requirements depending on the origin and type of migration. There can be no question of "uncontrolled" immigration. While, for example, labor migration from third countries is regulated by quotas, in the case of the PZF it is based on the actual needs of the economy.
• The different control systems lead to differences in the composition of immigration into the permanent resident population. Since 2008, around two-thirds of immigrants to the PFZ have come for employment reasons, while around one-fifth come for family reunification.
• The figures from the State Secretariat for Migration (SEM) only reflect the reason for immigration at the time of immigration. More meaningful for migration and integration into the labor market is labor force participation. According to the Observatory Report, this was over 85% for EU/EFTA citizens and just under 74% for third-country nationals in 2024.
• In addition to gainful employment, there are other reasons for immigration: Family reunification, education and training, residence permits without gainful employment or even a positive asylum decision. The assumption that these groups automatically generate costs is wrong. The federal government and cantons set clear requirements for the granting of residence permits. Support is only available under clear federal and cantonal guidelines.

Mixing up immigration figures is dubious

Mixing up all types of migration is just one example of how an undifferentiated presentation can paint a distorted picture. In order to have a serious debate, we should know the most important figures relating to immigration. Then it becomes clear that the widespread narrative does not stand up to the facts. Immigration follows clear rules, fulfills different functions and is of central importance for the labor market in particular. Anyone who mixes everything up paints a distorted picture and contributes little to a constructive discussion.