Conclusion The Swiss economy has enjoyed a high degree of monetary stability for some years now, and this advantageous situation should last for a number of years to come. While the international environment in which we operate has improved, it remains unstable. We cannot rule out fresh setbacks. However, we can count on the significant adaptability of our companies and look to the future with confidence. Nevertheless, our high standard of living in international terms should not lull us into complacency. In recent decades, we have seen our position among the leaders of the most highly developed countries eroded. Corrective measures are necessary. Let’s be clear: the main threat to our prosperity does not come from abroad, where the “made in Switzerland” label is still a success when it is associated with quality. The threat comes from within Switzerland. Take, for instance, our excessive predilection for regulations - often an invisible barrier to the free play of competitive forces - and our hesitation to fully accept an international environment that is more competitive and innovative than it was 20 years ago. The guiding principle for our structural reforms should be: more competition and fewer regulations. We have to have the courage to take this path in order to durably enhance our economic growth. This is essential to the balanced development of our economy and to the confidence that each of us feels in the future. It is with this wish that I conclude my remarks.
This figure reflects both a most significant decline in revenue and a notable increase in expenditure, of which more than 70% is directly related to the pandemic. The latest data, which exclude local government budgetary developments, are along these same lines: they show a budget deficit to August of 7.8% of GDP in cumulative 12-month terms, 4.9 pp up on the end-2019 figure. Besides the highly significant impact the pandemic has exerted on the main aggregate indicators of activity, its influence, and that of the measures implemented to contain it, has been extraordinarily asymmetrical across sectors, firms and workers. For instance, some services sectors linked to the hospitality industry and to transport, where activity habitually requires relatively high levels of social interaction, have since the start of the pandemic shown much more marked declines than those seen in the other sectors (e.g. manufacturing) across a wide range of activity, confidence and employment indicators. The regional distribution of the declines in activity and employment has also been very uneven.1 The crisis has also had a very uneven impact among workers.