It will take place next Sunday in Switzerland (and not in Spain, to the reader's relief or disappointment, as the case may be). Before commenting on this vote, I would like to ponder the importance of direct democracy in Switzerland, which makes this small country a political laboratory with worldwide repercussions. Anyone who has an idea and obtains 100,000 signatures in support of it can submit it to the popular will, which happens four times a year (apart from the cantonal or municipal referendums). Unlike draft legislation, which can be modified during the parliamentary process, proposals voted in referendum are not modified: even the most extravagant proposals will be submitted to popular scrutiny if they have the required number of signatures. The Swiss people have always shown a B dose of prudence and a sense of responsibility when deciding on all subject matters, even highly technical ones. When the topic of discussion is complex, the government prepares an explanatory brochure that is distributed to the public, thus facilitating an informed vote. The Swiss initiative has had repercussions beyond their own borders, as ideas approved by referendum have been adopted by other countries, such as the constitutional anchoring of the public debt ceiling: many of us are indebted to those Swiss who are concerned and worried about the good management.

On March 4, the Swiss will decide whether to abolish the tax that finances public television. The federal government has announced a change in the tax system: instead of paying the tax on the sets, as at present (CHF 451 per year), households will pay the tax from 2019 onwards, whether or not they have televisions. Public television and radio, which are part of the Swiss Broadcasting Corporation (SRG), have their future at stake, as three-quarters of their funding comes from this tax. If it is eliminated, the public broadcaster would have to disappear and its 6,000 employees would be left without work. Switzerland would become the only country in Western Europe without public television.

Why the referendum? The answer is clear: young people in Switzerland and around the world are watching less and less classic television. On their cell phones, they get their information from the Internet, listen to music on YouTube or Spotify, and watch movies and series on portals such as Netflix. The promoters of the referendum are precisely young libertarians, in favor of ending public subsidies and, by extension, the growing weight of the state. In this battle they have the support of many SMEs, as companies will be particularly affected by the next tax increase. On the other hand, large employers are opposed to this initiative for political reasons. The proponents of the referendum want the federal government to tender licenses for the management of television channels and radio stations after the liquidation of public television. Businessmen and politicians fear that someone like Christoph Blocher, head of the Swiss People's Party (SVP), could use this opportunity to strengthen his presence in the sector. The populist politician already has a few media outlets, and many fear that he could expand his influence and become a kind of Swiss Berlusconi. The SVP is the only political training to support the referendum initiative, which has made the establishment nervous. The SVP's fierce denunciations of the imminent "Berlusconization" of Switzerland have resonated with a large part of the population, and the polls do not give the referendum much chance of success. But as is often the case in such cases, discussion has already paid off.

The same discussion -with no referendum involved- is taking place in Germany, where the government is studying the demand for more funding by the two large public channels, ARD and ZDF. Their continued expansion of content supply distorts the market and threatens freedom of expression.

And what is the status in our country? We have recently left behind the consideration of television as a public service. In good time. But public channels, national and regional, maintain an exorbitant weight. Their management is highly deficient, and, although we do not have a tax like the German or Swiss, they are financed with the money of all. A superficial glance at their programming is enough to cast doubt on the public service function that would justify their existence. The bias of their news programs turns them into the voice of the government of the day. TV 3 and Catalunya Radio have recently become significant in the context of the procès. But they are not an isolated fact: as far as our community is concerned, we can look at EITB or the subsidy policy of the regional government (fortunately, Navarre is not enough to have a public television). Brussels has repeatedly drawn the Spanish Government's attention to the irregularity of our television market, but Madrid turns a deaf ear. When will a serious and open discussion on the function and meaning of public media be held?