The Swiss Federal Assembly has no full-time politicians; the chambers meet for 3 weeks at a time, four times a year.

However, many commentators believe reform is necessary both the make parliament more efficient and to safeguard democracy.

In the first place, the politicians do not always manage to work their way through the whole agenda during their sessions, despite often sitting late into the evening.

In the second place, the members of the Federal Assembly are paid very little for their political activity: they are expected to rely on their earnings from their main professions. Since the pay depends on the number of days they spend on parliamentary duties, the system works against new members, representatives of small parties and independants, who tend not to be given places on commissions. This has led to concern that only members of large parties or people in well-paid positions will be willing to stand for election.

At the same time, one source of income for some Assembly members is a position on a company board, and much concern has been expressed about possible conflicts of interest. Calls for transparency have been met with objections that income is a private matter.

Despite the problems arising from the system of part-time politicians, there is widespread opposition to making them professional, as is the case in most other countries. An argument often cited in favour of the current system is that Swiss Assembly members are closer to the concerns of the electors than their counterparts in other countries, and they can also bring a wealth of current professional expertise to parliamentary discussion.

Given the ever-increasing work load, many people believe members should receive an allowance to pay for personal assistants to help with research and secretarial work. However, such a proposal was overwhelmingly rejected by voters in 1992, and if parliament were to approve the idea, it would almost certainly be challenged in a referendum.