On 30 November 2008, Vaud voters rejected by 52.42 per cent (100,686 No against 91,385 Yes, on a 51.15 per cent turnout) the 390,000-franc study credit intended to finalise the project for a cantonal Museum of Fine Arts at Bellerive, on the Lausanne-Vidy lakeshore. A referendum backed by nearly 18,000 signatures had brought before the people what became, de facto, a vote for or against a museum at the water's edge.
The project — unanimously backed by the cantonal government and championed by a foundation chaired by former Lausanne mayor Yvette Jaggi — was to move the cantonal collections out of the cramped Palais de Rumine into a flagship building facing Lake Geneva, partly financed through a public-private partnership. Against it stood a motley coalition: lakeshore defenders hostile to any massive construction by the water, advocates of a downtown museum, and sceptics of the financing scheme.
The opponents' slogan — "not on the lakeshore" — hit home. Eighteen years on, that refusal looks like one of the most fruitful detours in Vaud's cultural policy: the museum was built elsewhere, and the canton gained an entire arts district in the bargain.
▲ Municipalities in favour Most of the lakeside arc backed the project — with two weighty exceptions: Lausanne, the host municipality, said No at 51.18 per cent (16,139 to 14,792 votes), as did Montreux. | ▼ Municipalities against The hinterland rejected the credit massively: from the canton's north to the Broye via the Gros-de-Vaud, regions far from the lake refused to pay for a museum "with its feet in the water". |
Key players
▲ Yes camp • Vaud government (unanimous, including culture minister Anne-Catherine Lyon and finance minister Pascal Broulis) • Yvette Jaggi (former mayor of Lausanne, chair of the museum foundation) • City of Lausanne executive and a majority of the cantonal parliament • Cultural and business circles (patrons of the public-private partnership) | ▼ No camp • Referendum committee (nearly 18,000 signatures) • Lakeshore defenders (against any massive construction by the water) • Downtown and Rumine advocates (for an accessible museum in the heart of the city) • Financing sceptics (critical of the public-private partnership) |
Arguments and verdicts — 18 years on
▲ Arguments FOR (Yes camp) Bellerive is the ideal site: a flagship museum by the lake will give the canton national cultural standing. The unanimous government and the foundation championed an "exceptional project" facing Lake Geneva. — Official voting booklet, November 2008 ✗~ Partially refuted The flagship ambition came true — elsewhere. The MCBA, opened in 2019 next to the railway station in the former locomotive hall, was an immediate success with the public. The "ideal" Bellerive site proved replaceable: the station location turned out to be better connected and more accessible. Source: RTS Culture; Tribune de Genève (2019) A refusal would bury the new museum for a generation and confine the collections to cramped Rumine. Supporters brandished the spectre of a lasting status quo in the event of a No. — Support committee campaign material, as reported in the press ✗ Refuted On the very evening of the vote, Anne-Catherine Lyon declared the museum project was not abandoned. Less than a year later, the SBB halls site was chosen (September 2009); eleven years after the refusal, the MCBA opened its doors. The 2008 No delayed the museum — it did not bury it. Source: City of Lausanne, statement of 30.11.2008; RTS (30.09.2009) | ▼ Arguments AGAINST (No camp) "Not on the lakeshore": the shores must remain free of massive construction. "Not on the lakeshore." — Referendum committee slogan, 2008 campaign ✓ Confirmed The principle held: no museum building was erected at Bellerive, and the canton gave up siting a major cultural facility on the shores. The 2008 vote durably enshrined Vaud's sensitivity to protecting the shores of Lake Geneva. Source: 24 heures, looking back at the Bellerive failure; Le Temps This is not a vote against a museum but against a location: a better site exists. Part of the opposition argued for the city centre and defended Rumine's role. — Referendum committee, 2008 campaign ✓ Confirmed What followed proved them right beyond their hopes: the SBB halls site, chosen in 2009 after broad consultation, delivered not only the MCBA (2019) but a complete arts district — Plateforme 10, with Photo Elysée and mudac (2022), for some 183.5 million francs of investment. Source: Wikipedia/Plateforme 10; plateforme10.ch; RTS (2009) |
Factual record · 2026
2 Confirmed | 1 Partially | 1 Refuted | 0 Not applicable |
From the Bellerive refusal to the arts district | RTS · plateforme10.ch · vd.ch |
| ✓ | September 2009 — after a consultation process, the canton selects the SBB locomotive halls site next to Lausanne railway station. The choice wins the consensus Bellerive never had. |
| ✓ | 5 October 2019 — the MCBA opens in the Barozzi Veiga building; attendance in the first months exceeds expectations, drawing visitors from across Switzerland and neighbouring countries. |
| ✓ | June 2022 — Photo Elysée and mudac join the MCBA: Plateforme 10 becomes a complete arts district, for a total investment of some 183.5 million francs (phases 1 and 2). |
| ~ | The cost of the detour — eleven years passed between the Bellerive refusal and the new museum's opening, years during which the cantonal collections remained cramped in the Palais de Rumine. The detour was fruitful, but it was not free. |
Eighteen years on, the vote of 30 November 2008 has become a textbook case — a popular refusal that ended up serving the very project it rejected. The opponents were right about the essentials: a better site existed, and the canton found it in under a year. The museum that resulted exceeds in ambition everything Bellerive promised, becoming the heart of an arts district unique in Switzerland.
The supporters, for their part, were wrong about their central prophecy: the refusal did not bury the museum for a generation. But their underlying conviction — that Vaud deserved a great museum and that Rumine no longer sufficed — was fully vindicated by events. In that sense, the winners and losers of 2008 were defending the same museum without knowing it.
The lesson reaches beyond cultural policy: a popular No is not always a No on substance. It can be a No to the place, the financing, the method. The Vaud authorities understood this, immediately relaunching the process rather than shelving the project — turning the legislature's most publicised defeat into its finest deferred success.