Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Still Waters

Swiss migration quotas: Rift with EU grows

23 posts in this topic

How far should non-EU member Switzerland follow the bloc's rules - and should the EU punish it if it does not?

The question has become live since the Swiss voted to introduce immigration quotas - contrary to the freedom of movement agreement it had signed with the EU.

And Brussels is aware that its response could have consequences in other countries which may seek to loosen their ties with the European Union.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...europe-27244959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
"I don't think we will be able to square this circle," said Ivo Scherrer, founder of a new political group called Operation Libero, designed, he says, to offer a different, less isolationist vision for Switzerland.

Why do so many people thinking having controlled borders or not sticking your nose to the business of every country around you is isolationist?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why do so many people thinking having controlled borders or not sticking your nose to the business of every country around you is isolationist?

I think their goal is to eliminate the idea of "countries" and make everyone part of a single government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had no idea that Switzerland was not part of the EU. Good for you Switzerland!!!

I think if the people, whom the Swiss government works for, decide they want to vote for immigration limits, I say too bad for the EU. Treaties are renegotiated all the time.

I say good for the Swiss people standing up for themselves.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU hates Switzerland anyway , as Switzerland practices a form of direct democracy, where the people really CAN compel their government to adopt - or abandon - specific laws. This is unique on the planet, as far as I am aware. It makes Switzerland the joker in the pack, and highly resistant to the propaganda of the European Project.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think their goal is to eliminate the idea of "countries" and make everyone part of a single government.

You got it right there,Single government no democracy just like the old USSR.Personally I hope Switzerland go tell Barroso and his self-styled politburo to go swivel....

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The E.U seems like thugs to me.

"Do what we say or suffer" is what it sounds like :innocent:

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Free movement of people is a corner stone of the European Union. they'll never bend on this issue, so Switzerland will have to take the full brute force coming its way from the EU. i guess we'll see another Swiss vote within 12 months, because the first vote was a close call.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU will talk big, but given that all the Eurocrats have their bank accounts hidden in Switzerland, they'll do exactly nothing to actually threaten the place.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The EU hates Switzerland anyway , as Switzerland practices a form of direct democracy, where the people really CAN compel their government to adopt - or abandon - specific laws. This is unique on the planet, as far as I am aware. It makes Switzerland the joker in the pack, and highly resistant to the propaganda of the European Project.

Where does this stuff come from!! "The EU hates Switzerland"!! Utter balls and complete fiction.

If Switzerland is "highly resistant to the propoganda of the European project" why did they choose to sign treaties with the EU and adopt provisions from EU legislation to allow it to participate in the EU single market?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The E.U seems like thugs to me.

"Do what we say or suffer" is what it sounds like :innocent:

Do a little research before you judge. Nobody forced the Swiss to sign up. They did it because they wanted the benefits. You join a club, even as an associate member, you abide by the rules or leave. Simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do a little research before you judge. Nobody forced the Swiss to sign up. They did it because they wanted the benefits. You join a club, even as an associate member, you abide by the rules or leave. Simple.

So the EU threat to impose tariffs and access to a single market which would break higher laws and most if not all International rules is not bullying?

You'll find that it is not quite so easy to leave their little club,just listen to the sound of Dummies being spat in Brussels if you do.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Free movement of people is a corner stone of the European Union. they'll never bend on this issue, so Switzerland will have to take the full brute force coming its way from the EU. i guess we'll see another Swiss vote within 12 months, because the first vote was a close call.

"Will have to take the full brute force coming it's way"

That's exactly what I'm talking about. That is how the EU acts, do as I say or suffer

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do a little research before you judge. Nobody forced the Swiss to sign up. They did it because they wanted the benefits. You join a club, even as an associate member, you abide by the rules or leave. Simple.

Are they then to be Forced to remain in the treaty? Or, should dropping out of the one treaty cause for the EU to drop them all in retribution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was ok when it first started out as a common market, reduce import / export tariffs ,pool resources like several countries building parts of aircraft,& cars etcetera then it went Political and thats when the fertilizer hit the windmill.Now we have a Euro gov't telling us that we can't deport known terrorists, as they may be killed if they go back to their own states.Then there is a huge population movement from small countries into the big 3 , Germany, France & U.K and 3/4 of these people have no trade expertise to offer so they sponge off the state and cause high unemployment.Then if anyone tries to leave they threaten to block all exports,and to isolate the country leaving, so you either stay and be bullied and ruled by beaurocrats who hate you anyway or get out and have a huge slice of your export market cut off.The laws these guys make are incredible, they even tried to block imports of "straight" bananas.Its a big joke if it wasn't serious.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was ok when it first started out as a common market, reduce import / export tariffs ,pool resources like several countries building parts of aircraft,& cars etcetera then it went Political and thats when the fertilizer hit the windmill.Now we have a Euro gov't telling us that we can't deport known terrorists, as they may be killed if they go back to their own states.Then there is a huge population movement from small countries into the big 3 , Germany, France & U.K and 3/4 of these people have no trade expertise to offer so they sponge off the state and cause high unemployment.Then if anyone tries to leave they threaten to block all exports,and to isolate the country leaving, so you either stay and be bullied and ruled by beaurocrats who hate you anyway or get out and have a huge slice of your export market cut off.The laws these guys make are incredible, they even tried to block imports of "straight" bananas.Its a big joke if it wasn't serious.

The EU is nothing but a protectionist union. if you look at it, free trade within the EU. but once you try to trade with those outside the Union you have to pay import taxes, then when you want to set up a trade deal with a non EU member you have to jump through hoops. but ultimately the final decision is made by the EU.

Europe will never be the future -The open seas - global trade is the source of our future wealth, that's why we should be free to set up our own trade deals. Britain outside of European entanglement is not a new idea. it was a strategy we employed in the mid to late 1800's - we even called it 'splendid isolation'

the European Unions actions and policy will eventually lead to upheaval across the continent. and with trade links to the wider world we (UK) can stand back, and not be dragged into mess not of our choosing. just look at the 2008 economic crisis, we were hit hard, then again by the Eurozone crisis. the reason why we are the fastest growing economy in the G7. highlights the benefit of not being fully signed up to the euro currency, like we nearly did. and remember at the time (1998) we was told if we didn't sign up to the Euro currency we'd be left behind, we'd lose trade and 6 million jobs. looking back we can see this wasn't true, and when it comes to leaving the EU the same argument is made today, we'd lose trade and 3 million jobs. it wasn't true then and it isn't now.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It has been my experience that the people who have issues with large 'umbrella' organisations - such as the EU - are the same people who would happily accept such an organisation when the ideals of it coincide with their own.

There is nothing inherently wrong, or 'evil', about large organisations, it is just that the capacity for corruption that exists in any organisation is multiplied by the size. To that end, the members of that organisation should be vigilant for, and fight against, corruption - but that does not mean arguing against the existence of such a body.

It is also true that, the larger an organisation, especially a political one, the more diverse will be the peoples it is intended to represent. This means the old maxim "you can't satisfy all the people all the time" becomes particularly problematic in the face of the nationalistic, parochial, attitudes that likely still exist among the peoples represented.

While I acknowledge the problem with corruption within the organisation - and to that effect do not have confidence in many, or most, of those in political authority to behave in the best interest of all it purports to represent - I have no issue with the notion of a European Union. It could be better, but it is, imo, a step in the right direction - away from isolationalism/parochialism and towards a more global, and inclusive, mind-set.

As for the internal difficulties Switzerland face because of the disagreement between it's parliament and people, that is for Switzerland to resolve. However, if they agreed to a treaty, but now wish to modify that agreement, then they need to address that with any other party involved. It cannot be a purely unilateral decision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think optimal government would be a worldwide network of small city-states (polises to give it an English plural -- central cities or towns with nearby secondary towns and suburbs and countryside), each mostly self governed but with an international structure that intervenes to prevent tyrannies and aggression and economic warfare and whatever else the international community found unacceptable. Just my pipe dream.

The tendency, if there really is one, for regional as opposed to international groups to develop worries me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are they then to be Forced to remain in the treaty? Or, should dropping out of the one treaty cause for the EU to drop them all in retribution?

People's dislike for the EC is colouring their thinking way too much. So, Seitzerland Signs up to gain the advantages then decides it doesn't like the ground rules. If it means that much the treaties can be nullified and the Swiss can walk away.

Nobody can or will force then to continue. But if they want to continue with the benefits, they have to stay within the terms. As would you in any club or contract. To talk in terms of retribution is emotively loaded language. Is it retribution or business sense if your bank forecloses on you if you stop paying your mortgage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good luck to the Swiss,they did the right thing by keeping out of the barrel of crap called E.U.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If Switzerland is "highly resistant to the propoganda of the European project" why did they choose to sign treaties with the EU and adopt provisions from EU legislation to allow it to participate in the EU single market?

Well, there's no mystery there. Switzerland chose to sign trade agreements with the EU, just as it did with many other nations. Most of these are to avoid what are termed "technical barriers to trade". To use a very simplistic example: a litre in Switzerland is the same as a litre in the EU, or America, or wherever. Ditto a kilogram.

Switzerland has resisted adopting many of the political aspects of the EU, such as control of interest rates, control of immigration, and other aspects of jurisprudence. (a European arrest warrant is not automatically recognised in Switzerland, for example).

From that perspective, it holds a similar position to .. say... Japan, or Australia, or America.

Where does this stuff come from!! "The EU hates Switzerland"!! Utter balls and complete fiction.

Well, that's my opinion.

Consider this: all three "main" UK political parties are committed to European Integration. Just look at the way they have denied the citizens any vote on the issue. Labour promised a refferendum, but immediately backed out once elected. The same is true of the "body politic" of most of the European nations. their citizens are deprived of any say on the issue of Europe, regardless of which of the traditional parties are in power, because ALL of the parties are committed to European Federalism.

Switzerland - due to its "direct democracy" system - is different. It doesn't matter WHAT clandestine plans the government may have, or what hidden agendas. The electorate can overturn them at any time. Worse still, not only can the electorate overturn a government decision, they can also implement new law, and there is nothing the government can do about it.

That concept is alien to the oligarchical EU, and THAT is why the EU is afraid of Switzerland.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People's dislike for the EC is colouring their thinking way too much. So, Seitzerland Signs up to gain the advantages then decides it doesn't like the ground rules. If it means that much the treaties can be nullified and the Swiss can walk away.

Nobody can or will force then to continue. But if they want to continue with the benefits, they have to stay within the terms. As would you in any club or contract. To talk in terms of retribution is emotively loaded language. Is it retribution or business sense if your bank forecloses on you if you stop paying your mortgage?

A better analogy would be that if you wanted to drop your car loan with your bank and go with another company, and they you bank drops your mortgage, your school loans, and your savings accounts.

Why can't the Swiss change their immigration policy without having to have seperate trade treaties and other treaties canceled? Isn't that the very idea behind retribution? Over-reacting to teach someone else they shouldn't mess with you.

I don't know if that is the actual case or not, but for discussion purposes, I believe if they want to renegotiate their immigration policy, they should be allowed to do so without threats

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A better analogy would be that if you wanted to drop your car loan with your bank and go with another company, and they you bank drops your mortgage, your school loans, and your savings accounts.

An even better analogy would be for the person, having taken out all those loans and agreeing a repayment schedule, then withholding some repayment because they want to spend the money elsewhere.

This is essentially what the Swiss are doing, defaulting on part of their "repayment".

Can renegotiations happen? Sure - but there will be quid-pro-quo involved. If the Swiss want to renege on part of their agreement, but keep the bits they 'like', they should recompense the EU for doing so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.