Transparent campaign financing is a key issue for democratic confidence. In Switzerland, only donations exceeding CHF 15,000 must be declared for federal votes and elections. Should this threshold be lowered, as advocated in particular by the left? <\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Le Regard Libre<\/em> put the question to two members of the Upper House.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Geneva State Councillor MCG<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n YES.<\/strong> No one can imagine winning an election without effective communication. And this communication, which tends more and more towards reductive slogans designed to appeal to the emotions, strike the right chord and mobilize voters, requires energy and increasingly substantial financial resources. We have recently seen an eloquent demonstration of this on the other side of the Atlantic, and we are not to be outdone on the European continent, where bluffing and bluffing are more profitable than long debates. These political campaigns require support, whether gracious or interested, and the distinction between the two is not always easy to make. In Switzerland, where more than anywhere else our direct democracy calls on voters to express themselves, this mobilization requires substantial and regular investment. And yet, this direct democracy, which is often the envy of many, can only function with the debate of ideas, and, as far as possible, with the transparency of the interests held by the protagonists. It's important to anticipate any \u00abbacklash\u00bb, as we like to call it. Donors who have contributed to the effectiveness of political action must be known. What is the limit that guarantees anonymity? The 15,000 francs set by our law must be reduced, and if this could dissuade donors, it's because the risk denounced is real.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\nMauro Poggia<\/strong><\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n