No-Billag opponents: "You don't treat headaches with the guillotine".
The No Billag initiative is a radical attack on the public service and direct democracy, say opponents. They consider the proponents' "Plan B" for purely commercial financing to be naive.
The "No to No Billag" committee is made up of 160 national parliamentarians. In the coming weeks, they want to campaign "with all their might" for a "No" in the vote on March 4.
The initiative for the abolition of radio and television fees is too extreme, representatives of the committee told the media on Tuesday. It attacks the existence of the SRG and regional and local radio and television stations head-on. A "yes" vote would damage democracy, as it is dependent on informed citizens.
"Total lack of solidarity"
The No Billag initiative was launched by the Young Liberals and members of the Young SVP. However, its opponents also include SVP and FDP exponents, including SVP Councillor of States Roland Eberle (TG). He found clear words.
"With this approach of total desolidarization, these circles are exposing themselves as fundamental opponents of direct democracy," he said. If the initiators' concept were to be taken to its logical conclusion, all of Switzerland's collective achievements would be sacrificed to individuality.
Total commercialization would give financially strong investors even more power in the Swiss media market to push through their own interests, the SVP member of the Council of States continued. "I don't want a situation like that in the USA or Italy for our country."
Pay more for less
CVP member of the Council of States Filippo Lombardi (TI) pointed out the drastic consequences that acceptance of the initiative would have for Romansh, French and Italian-speaking Switzerland in particular. There is obviously a certain malaise with regard to the SRG, he said. "But headaches are treated with aspirin, not the guillotine."
National Councillors Edith Graf-Litscher (SP/TG) and Adèle Thorens (Greens/VD) warned of higher costs for consumers. If the initiative is accepted, the already declining advertising revenue would fall further because attractive offerings with high viewer ratings would be lost.
If everyone only pays for what they consume, it costs more for the individual, as the costs have to be shared between fewer people. Thorens pointed to the experience with "pay TV" abroad. In Germany and Italy, for example, viewers only paid the same amount as Swiss fees for football. "No Billag" would mean paying more for less quality.
Play with fire
FDP National Councillor Christa Markwalder (BE) called the initiative "a dangerous game with fire." Although the referendum raises the legitimate question of the future media landscape in the age of digitalization and media concentration, it provides the wrong answers. Jürg Grossen (GLP/BE) spoke of an "irresponsible adventure".
The fact that the initiative is popular according to surveys is explained by opponents with economic and political interests in the background. Many people - especially young people - are no longer aware that someone has to produce the content they watch on their cell phones, said Lombardi.
Opponents are concerned that some voters apparently believe that a Yes vote would change very little. The text of the initiative is clear, emphasized Lombardi. "It is simply illusory to believe that the providers could continue to exist if a large part of their income is lost," said EVP National Councillor Marianne Streiff (BE). Thorens described the initiators' "Plan B" for purely commercial financing of SRG as "absolutely naive". (SDA)