The eternal exception: Cédric Wermuth and the rules for the others

There are politicians who set rules. And there are politicians who weaken the rules for themselves even during the planning stage – with a two-thirds majority, a compliant management, and a party that has reduced the word "renewal" to mere decoration.

Cédric Wermuth has been a member of the National Council since December 2011. Four legislative terms, over 14 years, and – if one roughly calculates the official compensation – around 2,0 to 2,3 million Swiss francs in public costs for his mandate alone. Add to that a lengthy, publicly funded course of study in Zurich and Bern from 2005 to 2015. Adding both together, depending on the calculation, one arrives at a figure of 2,2 to 2,6 million Swiss francs of state investment in a single individual – a man who publicly declares that the top one percent must finally contribute more.

That's not all. Things get interesting when you look at the second aspect, namely the tax implications. The full public burden of roughly 140,000 to 150,000 Swiss francs per year appears as a fraction on the tax form: Large expense allowances, such as annual compensation for personnel and material costs, meal, accommodation, and travel expenses, are tax-free. Taxable income from official positions: More like 75,000 to 90,000 Swiss francs. What the public finances and what appears as "income" for the politician are two very different figures. This is legal. This is inherent to the system. And that is precisely the problem – not as an individual accusation, but as a fundamental political question: Those who loudly point out the tax privileges of others should not silently benefit from a system that systematically understates their own income.

The rule with the expiration date
The SP Aargau has a term limit. Twelve years, then it's over – unless the delegates decide otherwise with a two-thirds majority. In 2022, they decided otherwise, even unanimously. On April 25, 2026, they repeated the maneuver at the regular party conference in Zofingen: 87 out of 95 votes cast, well above the required two-thirds majority. Wermuth is therefore allowed to run for a fifth time in 2027.

To put this in perspective: Wermuth had just recently declared publicly that "no one should be a member of the National Council forever." Immediately afterward, he explained that his position as co-president and his seat in the National Council were linked – he didn't want to leave Mattea Meyer alone. That sounds like self-sacrifice. It reeks of protecting vested interests.

The SP Aargau leadership framed the whole thing as "politically particularly valuable"—the combination of National Councillor and Co-President was simply irreplaceable. Lucia Engeli, Co-President of the SP Aargau, put it this way: "For us, it makes a huge difference whether we put the Co-President of the SP Switzerland on the list or not." A term limit that is circumvented twice in a row for the same man is no longer a limitation. It's mere formality. Decoration. A principle that apparently only applies as long as it affects the wrong people.

Equality tailored to your needs
The Social Democratic Party (SP) has been preaching renewal, promoting women, and limiting power for years. Back in 2019, Wermuth's candidacy for the Council of States was already fraught with internal party concerns about gender equality, because Yvonne Feri was passed over. One could call that democratic. But one could also soberly observe: A party that cites equality as its core principle and yet regularly has to explain why, in the end, the same man always ends up at the top has either a credibility problem or a personnel problem. Possibly both. The internal logic is simple: As long as he's the star attraction, the principle becomes a footnote.

Uniform as stage set
The image from a TV program, in which Wermuth appears in camouflage, fits seamlessly into this pattern. As far as is known, he did not perform military service and was listed as unfit for service. The medical reason is a private matter, not a political calculation. However, the staging is open to evaluation. Uniform as a prop, symbolism as a costume – it's the same mechanism on a smaller scale: where others perform, he performs. Where rules apply, he receives exceptions.

Sabbatical in Asia, carbon dioxide included
At the beginning of 2024, Wermuth took a two-month sabbatical and traveled with his family through Vietnam and the Philippines. His parliamentary duties were suspended during this time, and he was represented in his committee work. A sabbatical, publicly funded, and covered by the media like a self-discovery documentary. What made it particularly interesting was that Wermuth had previously called for a Europe-wide ban on short-haul flights. According to media reports, the long-haul flight generated as much CO₂ in two months as the average Swiss citizen emits in an entire year. When asked whether he intended to return or donate the compensation he received for those two months, Wermuth remained silent.

What he said instead was enlightening. "It's also beneficial to realize that neither Switzerland nor the world nor the Social Democratic Party will collapse if I'm away for two months," he explained. A self-awareness of almost philosophical depth – and confirmation of what many already suspected.

The question nobody asks
The question about health insurance premium subsidies is not unreasonable either. Not because it can be claimed that Wermuth receives them – that would be incorrect without supporting documentation. But because the system is based precisely on this: taxable income, deductions, family structure. Depending on the circumstances, a profile emerges that potentially qualifies someone for government relief. With a man who campaigns for greater redistribution in the National Council and declares that the privileged must pay, one is justified in asking how high up he himself ranks – and how that appears on his tax return.

The professional politician as a system statement
Wermuth is not an isolated case. Sixteen years in the National Council, two special permits, a long education at public expense, a sabbatical paid for by the state, a flight ban for others and a long-haul flight for himself – and in between, always the same message: The others are not taking enough responsibility.

It is an expression of a political class that lives on solidarity, preaches rules, organizes exceptions for itself, and tells citizens they must contribute more.