Found an error?
Report now
National Councillor Ueli Schmezer criticizes the intransigence of Federal Councillor Albert Rösti.
Picture: Keystone
After the clear No to the SRG initiative, Media Minister Albert Rösti is coming under pressure. Despite the referendum, he wants to make further savings at the SRG - much to the annoyance of the parliamentary left.
Following the clear no to the SRG initiative, the political debate about the future of the SRG continues unabated. Media Minister Albert Rösti (SVP) had to face uncomfortable questions in the National Council on Monday. Representatives of the left-wing parties accused him of sticking to savings plans and concession changes that could weaken the public media service, despite the referendum.
Rösti was lucky: Question Time only lasted an hour and the questions about his department were answered in writing. He was therefore spared a direct battle of words in the Council. However, the criticism from the center-left remained clear.
The reason: after the popular rejection of the SRG initiative, the reduction of the Serafe levy to CHF 300 decided by the Federal Council would not have been necessary. The left also doubts that Rösti is interpreting the will of the people correctly. According to their interpretation, by voting no to the initiative, voters were not demanding a weakened, but a strengthened SRG.
However, Rösti remains firm. The fee is to be reduced to CHF 300 and the SRG license is to be revised. In future, the SRG should concentrate more on information, education and culture, while entertainment and sport should only be offered where private providers cannot step in.
This is precisely what is causing resistance in parliament. SP National Councillor Jacqueline Badran (Zurich) and Green National Councillor Michael Töngi (Lucerne) criticize that there is no empirical or economic evidence that private providers could profitably produce sports or entertainment programmes in the small, four-language market. In addition, according to Badran, all sports associations had made "devastating" comments in the consultation on the fee reduction.
SP National Councillor David Roth (Lucerne) in turn questioned Rösti's statements from Sunday's vote, when he criticized the SRG and called for "more balance". Roth wanted to know whether the Federal Council was spreading misinformation. Rösti evaded the question and merely emphasized that it was important for the Federal Council to "strictly adhere to the principle of fairness".
Bernese SP National Councillor Ueli Schmezer, formerly known as the "Kassensturz" presenter, was also critical. Schmezer wanted to know which law the Federal Council was using to justify the fee reduction to CHF 300. He already suspected on the Sunday of the vote that Rösti's approach was on thin ice legally. Rösti replied: "The SRG's program mandate is defined in the concession. This is currently being revised. In the process, offerings and financial requirements are being harmonized."
Schmezer criticized blue News on Tuesday morning: "This is exactly the opposite of what the law requires." Article 68a of the Radio and Television Act clearly stipulates that the amount of the fee is based on the costs of the program - and not the other way around. "First lowering the fee and then reducing sport, entertainment and online as part of the new concession is not only against the law but a blatant disregard for the result of the vote," said Schmezer.
At the request of blue News, the media office of Federal Councillor Rösti did not comment on the reactions from the left before the editorial deadline.
The fact is: even if a Federal Councillor acts unlawfully, no court will want to deal with it. According to the Federal Supreme Court Act, no "acts of the Federal Assembly and the Federal Council" may be challenged in the Federal Supreme Court. Rösti's fee reduction can therefore only be fought through political means.
