On 27 September 2009, Vaud voters approved, with 70.81% Yes, the addition of a new Article 63a to the cantonal Constitution devoted to the « all-day school ». The score, above 70%, reflects a broad consensus on the need for childcare structures for schoolchildren.
Article 63a provides that « in cooperation with the State and private partners, municipalities organise supervised out-of-school care, optional for families, in the form of an all-day school on or near school premises, throughout compulsory schooling ». The care covers children aged 4 to 15, with at minimum a midday service including a meal.
With the principle enshrined in the Constitution, its concrete implementation required years of negotiation between the canton and the municipalities. This briefing tests the campaign's promises and fears against the facts observed since the vote.
▲ Overall result Article 63a approved with 70.81% Yes. Broad popular support for enshrining out-of-school care in the cantonal Constitution. | ▼ Vote map Very broad acceptance canton-wide, in towns and regions alike. The district-by-district breakdown is not reproduced here. |
Actors and figures
▲ Yes camp • Socialist Party and the Greens • Teachers' unions and associations • Family circles and parents' associations • Vaud Council of State (support for implementation) • Part of the centre | ▼ No camp • SVP Vaud • Part of the FDP/PLR and Liberals • Municipalities worried about costs (financial and organisational burden) • Opponents of an obligation imposed on municipalities |
Arguments and verdicts
▲ Arguments FOR (Yes camp) Reconciling family and working life « Families need childcare structures to reconcile work and raising children. » ✓ Confirmed Out-of-school care expanded strongly after the vote, driven by sustained demand. It was implemented through the revision of the Child Day-Care Act (LAJE), generalising midday and evening provision. Source: Canton of Vaud; SPV (teachers) Meeting a real and growing need « Demand for places exceeds supply; this backlog must be cleared. » ✓ Confirmed Demand for out-of-school places kept growing in the following years, forcing municipalities and the canton to create new structures and secure their funding through the Child Day-Care Foundation (FAJE). Source: Canton of Vaud; FAJE Optional care, not an obligation on families « Care will remain optional: no family will be forced to use it. » ✓ Confirmed The optional nature for families, written into Article 63a, was preserved: parents remain free to use out-of-school care or not. Source: Vaud Constitution, Art. 63a | ▼ Arguments AGAINST (No camp) A heavy financial burden for municipalities « The obligation to organise care will place an excessive financial and organisational burden on municipalities. » ✓~ Partly confirmed The fear was not baseless: implementation was long and costly, requiring years of canton-municipality negotiation. But shared financing (FAJE, employer and cantonal contributions) spread the burden, preventing it from falling on municipalities alone. Source: Canton of Vaud; FAJE An infringement of municipal autonomy « Imposing a care model on municipalities infringes their organisational autonomy. » ✗~ Partly refuted Municipalities retained organisational latitude (premises, providers, hours) within the framework set by the canton. Autonomy was not abolished but framed by a common minimum standard. Source: Canton of Vaud; press coverage A nationalisation of childcare « The all-day school amounts to handing childcare to the State at the expense of families. » ✗ Refuted Since care remained optional and organised by municipalities with private partners, no nationalisation of childcare is documented: families decide freely whether to use it. Source: Vaud Constitution, Art. 63a |
Factual record
4 Confirmed | 0 Partly confirmed | 1 Partly refuted | 0 Refuted |
Fifteen years on, Article 63a has kept its promise: out-of-school care has become a reality in the canton, written into law and durably funded. The Yes camp's central promise — meeting families' needs while leaving the choice — was concretely kept, the optional nature never called into question.
The opponents' fears were partly borne out: implementation was long and costly, so much so that five years after the vote the State had to relaunch the canton-municipality platform. The financial burden was real. But it was spread across canton, municipalities and employers through the FAJE, not left to municipalities alone.
As for the charge of « nationalising » childcare, it does not withstand the facts: care remained optional and locally organised, with private partners. The canton set a minimum standard, not a single model. The episode mainly shows that a landslide vote never spares the patient work of implementation.