[REVISION HISTORY]

Slovenia's referendum battles deepen

Updated 8 times since CLSTR started tracking revisions of this situation.

What changed

2026-09-15 21:42 UTC → 2026-09-17 20:42 UTC · added ~~removed~~

The signature collection campaign to trigger a referendum on the Intervention Act for the Development of Slovenia (ZIURS) has encountered technical and logistical challenges. While early reports suggested momentum with signatures surpassing 47,000, more recent data from the campaign—led by the Confederation of Public Sector Trade Unions and the Association of Free Trade Unions of Slovenia—indicates approximately 28,000 signatures were collected over 20 days. This pace falls short of the 45,000 signatures originally projected for a ten-day period. To trigger the referendum, at least 40,000 verified signatures must be submitted by the October 5 deadline. Technical disputes have surfaced regarding the eUprava digital portal. The Ministry of the Interior and Public Administration stated that technical issues hindering submissions were resolved as of September 3. State Secretary Božo Predalič noted that while the system experienced slowdowns for two days, it “did not crash,” though he acknowledged the necessity for future upgrades. ~~Critics have attributed the slower progress to low engagement among workers and retirees, noting~~ However, labor unions report that ~~60 percent of signatures have been submitted electronically. Meanwhile, opposition members in~~ problems with the ~~National Assembly~~ portal have ~~called for discussions to ensure~~ persisted during the collection ~~process remains “secure, stable,~~ process. As of mid-September, trade unions and ~~politically neutral.” The core dispute remains~~ political groups, including Levica, have gathered over 30,000 signatures. Opponents argue the ~~proposed ‘development cap,’ which seeks to reduce~~ law threatens public services such as healthcare, education, and social ~~security contributions on monthly gross salaries exceeding 7,500 euros. Unions contend the reform primarily benefits high earners~~ security, and ~~entrepreneurs while creating gaps~~ could lead to cuts in ~~public treasury funds, whereas proponents argue it will boost economic competitiveness by lowering labor costs~~ wages and pensions. Specifically, critics highlight the law’s aim to abolish a 1% contribution for ~~highly qualified professionals.~~ long-term care from net pensions. Conversely, the NSi party has criticized the Levica party, suggesting the referendum could prevent financial reliefs for pensioners. If the signature threshold is met, a referendum vote may occur in late November.

Versions

Only revisions since CLSTR began indexing content versions appear here. Select a version to see what changed compared to the one before it.