Cantonal referendum on "Scholarship Act - Education for Everyone!"

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Cantonal referendum
"Regarding the Scholarship Act - Education for Everyone!"
Result: Declined
General
Canton: Lucerne
Date: September 25, 2005
Participation: 56.62%
Recommendation of the Cantonal Council
Yes: 13
No: 86
result
Yes: 46,981 (35.77%)
No: 84,356 (64.23%)
Yes votes by district
map

The cantonal referendum on "Scholarship Law - Education for Everyone!" was a referendum in the Swiss canton of Lucerne that took place on September 25, 2005. The content of the vote was an amendment to the Lucerne Scholarship Act with the aim of bringing the canton's training contributions in line with the national average.

Background and content

The initiative was submitted in 2003 by members of the Swiss Young Socialists and Swiss Social Democratic Party in response to the decline in scholarship expenditure since 1994. The initiators mentioned the following goals:

  • Consideration of the SKOS guidelines
  • Increase in the income limit above which parents owe their children contributions
  • Granting more grants instead of loans

The Lucerne Grand Council argued against the initiative that a new scholarship law had already come into force on August 1, 2003 and that the initiative did not take the latest developments into account. Between 2002 and 2004, scholarship expenditure rose from 8.5 to 12 million francs, which means that Lucerne is already on average or slightly above average in a cantonal comparison. Furthermore, the Grand Council predicted that this amount would almost double again if the initiative were adopted.

Voting result

The turnout was about 56% in all offices in Lucerne . With 41%, the initiative in the Lucerne office achieved the highest percentage of votes in favor, and with 28% in the Entlebuch office, the lowest percentage of votes. The initiative was therefore rejected by all five offices with a total of 64% no votes.

Office Voting participation Yes (number) No (number) Yes (percent) No (percent) adoption
Entlebuch   55.15% 1995 5,032 28.39% 71.61% No
Hochdorf 55.42% 7,062 14,536 32.70% 67.30% No
Lucerne 57.29% 25,081 36,045 41.03% 58.97% No
Sursee 56.72% 7'422 16,773 30.68% 69.32% No
Willisau 56.31% 5'421 11,970 31.17% 68.83% No
Total (5) 56.62% 46,981 84,356 35.77% 64.23% No

Objection and complaint

Shortly before the vote, on September 2, 2005, three people submitted an objection to the planned vote. The content of the objection was the incorrect specification of the 11 million francs additional costs forecast by the Grand Council in the voting report of July 5, 2005 April 2005, additional costs of CHF 7.6 million would now be expected. Thus the voters were impaired in their opinion-forming. The plaintiffs asked for a corrected new version of the voting report or, if not, a postponement of the vote on September 25, 2005. The objection was rejected by the government council on September 13, 2005, according to which the objections were submitted to the federal court on September 14 as a constitutional complaint was moved on. This decided on September 22nd that the vote neither had to be postponed nor canceled. After the initiative was rejected on September 25, the plaintiffs renewed their complaint on September 29, requesting that the voting result be reversed. On April 20, 2006, this appeal was dismissed by the Federal Supreme Court and the voting result was declared valid. The justification for the judgment was, among other things, that the voting result with 36%: 64% was so clear that “the possibility that the vote would have turned out differently without the deficiencies does not appear serious against the background of all the circumstances”.

See also

Individual evidence

  1. Law on training grants (Scholarship Act)
  2. a b Popular initiative “Regarding the law on scholarships - Education for everyone!”: Government council rejects objection. ( Memento of the original from October 5, 2013 in the Internet Archive ) Info: The archive link was inserted automatically and has not yet been checked. Please check the original and archive link according to the instructions and then remove this notice. Media release from September 14, 2005. @1@ 2Template: Webachiv / IABot / www.lu.ch
  3. SKOS guidelines
  4. Federal Supreme Court: Procedure 1P.582 / 2005 of September 14, 2005 and Procedure 1P.650 / 2005 of September 29, 2005

Web links