The extraordinary session on PFAS during the Swiss Parliament’s 2025 autumn session was remarkably factual. For Badertscher, one thing is clear: PFAS are a problem that affects everyone. Accordingly, there was broad political willingness to initiate first measures such as funding research, examining possible labelling requirements, and providing support for farms whose soils are contaminated with PFAS residues.

Badertscher also emphasises how strongly different stakeholders – NGOs, industry associations and the private sector – attempt to influence political decisions. Such lobbying shapes parliamentary work, not only for PFAS but for almost every issue in the fields of environment and agriculture.

Many political debates revolve around conflicting goals: How can health protection, environmental concerns and economic realities be reconciled? Badertscher describes how difficult these trade-offs are and explains that misunderstandings often arise between agriculture and politics. Both sides have their blind spots: agriculture sometimes struggles to acknowledge certain problems, while policymakers tend to underestimate the practical challenges of agricultural production.

A key point for Badertscher is equal treatment of imports and domestic production. Her motion for zero tolerance of prohibited active substances on imported products was accepted and must now be implemented. This will lead to adjustments in value chains – but such changes take time. A second issue is access to lower-risk plant protection products. According to Badertscher, the approval process for low-risk products takes far too long. Her motion aims to speed up this process so that safer alternatives become available more quickly.

Badertscher also argues that the role of consumers is underrepresented in political discussions. Anyone demanding more sustainability and stricter rules must also reflect on their own consumption behaviour. She emphasises that regulation is always the result of balancing different interests: NGOs, industry, agriculture and politics. What matters is that all parties recognise the problem and work together on solutions.

Badertscher supports the idea that plant protection products banned in Switzerland should not be exported. However, this demand falls short. Swiss manufacturers export only products that have a full OECD dossier and are authorised and regulated in the country of destination. International regulation is based on local agronomic needs and crops; Switzerland, for example, does not grow cashews, avocados or cotton. A special Swiss regulation would unnecessarily complicate international trade without improving public protection in the importing country. When a country needs plant protection products, it will import them – even from dubious sources: the trade in counterfeit and illegal pesticides, online and offline, poses a serious threat not only to agriculture but also to public health and the environment. If countries like Switzerland truly want to protect farmers in states with weaker regulatory systems, they rely on technical assistance – helping to build robust regulatory authorities – as foreseen by the Rotterdam Convention.