[ad_1]
The district administrator rejected a corresponding law on Thursday on second reading. Thus, the district administrator followed with 71 to 5 votes and 6 abstentions from the government, which had also spoken out against the bill caused by an advance in parliament. Previously, the council had approved the law with immediate effect by 43 votes to 38 and 2 abstentions.
However, as the necessary two-thirds majority was not achieved and a referendum would have been necessary next year, the district administrator of the SP, who had presented the postulate, also spoke in favor of the rejection.
One reason for this is that the law in question would become obsolete if it came into force at a later date. In the Corona crisis, municipalities now depend on the ballot box: in June no one needs the law anymore, said the SP district administrator.
The fact that the municipal councilors could decide on the implementation of the ballot box as an alternative to the municipal assemblies was extremely controversial in the district administrator. The SVP and Verdes / EPP groups spoke out against the bill. Opponents complained, for example, that the bill would lead to the dismantling of democracy, calling it legally sensitive.
Finance and Church Director Anton Lauber (CVP) also emphasized that democracy should not be experimented on. “I don’t have a good feeling about this law,” Lauber said at first reading on Wednesday.
Failed rejection
The SP, CVP / GLP and the majority of the FDP parliamentary group supported the proposal. It was said that this option would not delay important matters. The Greens / PPE group had submitted a request for rejection on Wednesday, but it was rejected by 43 votes to 39.
It was not until November 5 that the district administrator transferred the corresponding SP postulate to the government. As a result, the Basel government had drafted a law on crown-related alternatives to community meetings in an emergency procedure and sent it for consultation.
From the beginning, the government ruled against the bill, which would have resulted in a deviation from municipal law for a limited period until June 2021. In principle, it is still possible to hold community meetings, he explained.
