The motion by Councillor of States Benedikt Würth (center/SG) demands that the federal government should in future only be responsible for objects of national importance. While the protection of sites will be transferred entirely to the cantons. This would remove the national inventory of sites worthy of protection as a common basis for assessment. The result would be different cantonal regulations, lengthy conversions and more legal disputes.
The National Council’s Committee for Science, Education and Culture considers the path taken by the Federal Council to be more expedient. The measures agreed at the ISOS Round Table strengthen efficiency and clarity without abandoning proven standards.
Reform instead of rupture
Specific simplifications have already been agreed. Such as a more precise application of ISOS to federal tasks, clearer discretionary powers for cantons and municipalities and simplifications for projects with photovoltaics. These steps shorten procedures without sacrificing quality and are supported by the cantons, cities and municipalities.
The central problem is not the ISOS itself, but the lack of coordination and the fact that interests are weighed up too late. If this is done at an early stage, conflicts can be avoided and projects accelerated.
Proven examples from practice
Successful models already exist. In Geneva, the “Patrimoine-Paysage-Territoire” platform significantly reduces the number of objections through joint project development. Neuchâtel shows how densification can be reconciled with ISOS through clear zoning and high-quality planning. These approaches strengthen transparency, acceptance and building culture.
Accelerate with substance
Instead of creating legal uncertainty, the ongoing ISOS development should be implemented consistently. Quality and planning security are the key to faster, sustainable construction, not federal patchwork. Only those who combine the two will achieve the goal of building simply without endangering our established building culture.
