Parliamentaryprocedural procedural requests 2008–18 Parliamentary requests 2008–18 153 Number of FDFA items of business 80 86 59 66 64 64 67 56 56 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 6% 5% 6% 7% 5% 6% 7% 5% 5% 6% 8% 7% 11% 9% 10% 10% 10% 9% 10% 11% 13% 21% 53 31 50 64 73 56 2008 70 71 68 78 93 100 95 117 150 Share of FDFA items of business in per cent 0 Procedural requests in the narrow sense: motions, postulates, interpellations, questions (i.e. not posed at question time NC) Questions posed at question time (National Council only) Source: Parliamentary Services However, there is also a need to define Parliament’s participation rights more precisely. This applies especially to soft law. The first point that should be clarified is the content of this policy instrument and how it is delineated from other instruments. Second, it must be decided which soft law agreements the committees are to be consulted on and in which form. Given the number of agreements of this kind, Parliament will have to restrict itself to the most significant cases. The challenge will lie in assessing what qualifies as ‘significant’. In addition to defining participation rights more precisely, the Federal Council should advocate in the international arena for parliamentarians to be given a greater role in shaping soft law within international organisations. The OECD consultation mechanisms and the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the OSCE can serve as models here. In the case of the cantons, there is a need to clarify the extent of their rights to participate in shaping foreign policy. The division of roles is undisputed and the participation processes are well established. The cantons are demanding to be consulted more frequently on European policy matters, and at an earlier stage: receiving comprehensive information would enable them to play a greater role in shaping the Swiss agenda on European policy. The cantons would like to see their concerns taken into account more systematically in the preparations for treaty negotiations. 21 2028 Foreign Policy Vision The cantons are proposing that any loss of autonomy occasioned by the agreements with the EU be compensated by according greater weight to their own positions. This would allow the federalist state structure to be preserved. In the case of European policy plans that touch on their powers, the cantons believe their consolidated opinions should now be considered ‘legally binding inter pares’ (in German: ‘relative Bildungswirkung’). This means that the Federal Council would only be able to deviate from the agreed position if there were overriding foreign policy interests for doing so. It would also have to set down its reasons in writing. Lastly, cantonal representatives are calling for the existing mechanism through which the cantons discuss European policy with the federal government to be developed into a more formalised joint coordination body. The Confederation and the cantons aim to maintain their well-functioning partnership on foreign policy. A joint analysis should determine whether the opportunities for the cantons to have a say need to be adapted. It should be added that there is no adequate legal basis for foreign policy at present. There is no framework act for foreign policy, and the Federal Act on Development Cooperation is outdated. The respective powers of the Federal Council, Parliament and the cantons in matters of foreign policy