Köhler, Stüdeli und Partner GmbH managed the “No” campaign of the “No to the treaties” association.
The political agency from Bern was responsible for all strategic tasks and, together with the Basel agency Chtanova Communications, for the operational implementation.
The visuals were developed by the Basel-based graphics agency Vischer Vettiger Hartmann.
BS rejected the merger of all public hospitals (USBL and KSBL) by 56 percent.
This means that the merger has failed.
Lukas Engelberger (CVO BS) made too many concessions to the canton of BL (BS bears two thirds of the costs and pays nothing to university medicine, all BL locations are retained).
The two government councillors Lukas Engelberger (CVP BS) and Thomas Weber (SVP BL) have largely negated the consultation submissions of the stakeholders.
If individual points had been included (public institution instead of public limited company, closure of Bruderholz, network of public and private hospitals, equal financing BS/BL), both the SP and the private hospitals would have been in favor of the merger.
The proposal presented was overloaded, too rigidly defined and the planning horizon of 15 years was too long.
BS was not willing to bear two thirds of the costs of the ailing KSBL.
The No vote may also have been influenced by sensitivities between the half-cantons of BS and BL, which came to light during the vote on the cantonal merger in 2014.
This time the signs were reversed: BS rejected the merger, BL accepted it. Task of the No campaign The No campaign had to point out the high risks of the merger.
The problem was that both the two cantonal councils and the leading media (Basler Zeitung BaZ and Basellandschaftliche Zeitung bz) presented the merger in a one-sidedly positive light.
The quality of reporting in the print media was below average.
TeleBasel reported in a balanced manner.
The No campaign had to ensure that opinion-forming was as balanced as possible and that both the positive and negative aspects were communicated.
This would have been the role of the government councillors in charge.
The explanatory notes to the vote in the canton of Basel were important for the No vote.
These were formulated in a balanced way and also mentioned the risks of the merger. Measures The campaign started with a media briefing on January 10, 2019.
In the same week, all BS households were sent a flyer and posters with separate key messages were put up in BS and BL.
Testimonial advertisements were occasionally placed in print media.
At the heart of the campaign was a target group-specific Facebook campaign that addressed the sensitivities of the respective target group in a differentiated manner. Findings Government Councillor Lukas Engelberger (CVP BS) reacted very emotionally and did not respond enough to the opponents.
The health director is responsible for the unbalanced bill, the parliament failed to adapt the bill.
It was a mistake that no compromise bill was presented.
The voters in the BS realized that the bill was one-sided.
This is also the reason for the high level of approval in BL.
The letter from both health directors to the private hospitals, according to which they were not allowed to comment on the merger due to a “lack of qualified concern”, was not well received by the electorate.
The private hospitals were able to show that the public hospitals had carried out “voting propaganda” to a similar extent. The statement by a hospital representative that the flyers had only been on display at the USB for an hour was simply implausible.
The conclusion of some media that the healthcare system is incapable of reform is wrong in the case of this vote.
It would only have taken a few corrections after the consultation for the merger to be accepted in BS as well.
Neither the SP, the VPOD nor the private hospitals were against the merger in principle.
With a pinch of political tact and more respect for the other side, this merger could have been won.
The No vote is a missed opportunity.
However, it is not the No voters in BS who are to blame, but the politicians who failed to present the people with a balanced proposal.
This proposal was so one-sidedly positive for BL that BS was almost forced to vote no.