The Swiss have spoken. And they have rejected a bid to cap their population. The vote was close, but the result is clear. The anti-immigration Swiss People's Party (SVP) saw its plan go down in flames. The SVP wanted to stop net migration above 0.2% of the population. They argued that Switzerland is full. But the Swiss public disagreed, voting 62% against the measure.
This matters in Westminster. Because the Swiss vote is being watched by Eurosceptics. The SVP's proposal was a direct challenge to the 'free movement' model. The Swiss have a special arrangement with the EU. They can curb immigration under a 'safeguard clause'. But the SVP wanted a permanent cap. They failed.
So what does this mean for Brexit? The 'Brexit tribe' in Number 10 are jubilant. They see this as vindication for the UK's new immigration model. The argument goes like this: the UK left the EU precisely to control its borders. The Swiss tried a different route. They stayed in the single market, with free movement. And they cannot cap immigration. The referendum on the cap failed. So the UK model, with points-based immigration outside the single market, is the only way.
One senior Brexiteer source told me: 'The Swiss have shown what happens if you stay half-in, half-out. You get no control. We have full control. That's the bonus of being out.' The same source pointed to the UK's new 'Australian-style' system, which prioritises skills over origins. The Swiss system is still tied to EU nationals.
But there is a twist. The Swiss rejection of the cap does not mean they embrace open borders. Polling shows Swiss voters want lower migration. But they rejected this specific cap because it was too rigid. The SVP's proposal would have broken Switzerland's treaty with the EU. Most Swiss voters prefer a pragmatic approach, not diplomatic chaos.
That is the lesson for Boris Johnson. Voters want control, but not at any cost. The UK's departure from the EU was messy, but it is done. Now Johnson must deliver on the 'oven-ready' trade deal and lower net migration. The Swiss vote reminds him that voters are watching. If the new system does not curb numbers, the backlash will be fierce.
There is also a deeper point about sovereignty. The Swiss vote was a national decision. But even in rejecting the cap, Switzerland asserted its right to decide. That's the irony. The SVP wanted to use sovereignty to restrict immigration. The voters used sovereignty to say no. Either way, sovereignty was exercised. That is the prize the UK has won.
Back in the Westminster village, the mood is smug. The 'Sovereignty Caucus' in the Conservative Party sees this as a win. 'We told you so,' they say. But caution is needed. The Swiss were presented with a binary choice: cap or no cap. They chose no cap. That does not mean they like the status quo. It means they did not trust the SVP's solution.
The real test for the UK will come when net migration figures are published next year. If they are still high, the clamour for a cap will grow. The Swiss experience shows that voters do not want sledgehammer solutions. They want precision tools. Johnson's team is banking on the points-based system being that tool.
In the meantime, the Brexiteers will enjoy this moment. They will point to Switzerland and say: 'See, we were right to leave.' And for now, they have the evidence on their side.
