1. Title: IN 193-C PL 13609
2. Objective: To discuss and vote on a counterproposal to the Initiative (IN) 193-B, focusing on fiscal policy changes, specifically a tax on sugar.
3. Proposed Modifications: The counterproposal aimed at creating a mechanism for sugar taxation to fund social welfare programs, which is very different from the initial proposal of a cheque for 300 francs to certain beneficiaries.
4. Discussions and Avis: The document provides a summary of the audition of Mr. Pierre Maudet, Counselor of State, who informed that the counterproposal had generated extensive debate within the Council of State, but they ultimately decided not to propose a counterproposal based on a sugar tax due to other ongoing fiscal matters. A group of experts had proposed a very audacious plan for a sugar tax, but it was considered too different from the initial proposal and raised institutional issues.
5. Implications: The Counselor of State expressed concern over the tendency to react to initiatives with counterproposals that are significantly different in nature (as seen in other cases such as IN 192). The document mentions the Council of State's opposition to the mechanism of the initiative itself and its incompatibility with the initial proposal.