Yeaterday's Swiss vote to regain control of their immigration policy in the face of the EU free movement of peoples, which they had previously signed up to, is going to create an EU storm. Were they right or wrong? Business doesn't like it - they want free movement of labour for obvious reasons. But the argument for it was based on the following: Swiss population: 8m Net immigration: 80k pa (1%) 23% of people living in Switzerland weren't born there. Thus in the next 10 years, with no change to immigration law, foreigners in the land will rise from 1/4 to 1/3 Look at this table of European population densities. Area and population of European countries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia England doesn't look too good, eh? Remember that Switzerland is mostly mountain so you won't be building on that much. Is this going to spark a similar movement in heavily populated EU countries which experience net immigration, or not? Will the EU punish Switzerland for its impertinence?
My understanding is that the agreement under discussion is part of a package of agreements negotiated with the EU and is indivisible from the totality of that package. Therefore it will certainly cause a major issue and could require a major renegotiation on a much wider range of issues, or it could just be ignored, like it never happened. Who knows ? The requirement is now for the Swiss government to draft appropriate legislation and no doubt there will be much lobbying regarding that legislation. Were the Swiss right to do so ? Absolutely.
Thread moved to Other Bikes. The Swiss, and johnv as well, clearly feel that they have a principle of national identity to preserve. The objection probably isn't on the grounds of economics as generally speaking, in Western countries, immigration has a positive effect on the host nation's economy. Correct me if I am wrong there. This must be purely an ethnic consideration. The Swiss seem to be a mishmash of German, French, Italian ... yet they have this national identity. My question - in the globalised World most of us currently inhabit, is the idea of national identity becoming, or already, outdated? Aside from a few throwbacks and recidivists in this forum, of course :smile:
How much the EU decides to connect the Swiss view on immigration with the raft of other agreements will depend on how bellicose they are feeling. Will they want to torpedo trade with Switzerland (both sides are beneficiaries) just to make the Swiss suffer for holding the option to cap EU (and everyone else) immigration at levels they deem appropriate (rather than what Brussels deems appropriate)? This is unknown. They could take a grown-up approach to it, but they may well not. It will also depend how much support for the Swiss there is from places like Britain and Germany, neither of which are overjoyed at the present arrangement. The legislation will not allow much wriggle room for lobbying - as the people have spoken. On the other hand, the quotas, which will vary year on year, will allow lots of wriggle room. It's the principle that has been voted on, not the actual numbers. It might end up being "business as usual". But if a country can't decide who its inhabitants are, what sovereignty does it have left? Interesting to see where Rumania sits on the pop density chart. Loads of room for people there...
Could it prove to be an El Alamein moment or will the EU blitzkrieg steamroller the plucky Swiss as an example to all free thinking individuals ?
National and cultural identities are strong the world over. The Globalised World exists for the benefit of global elites, not for the average man, woman or child.
The EU will have to be seen to act in the face of the Swiss's almost Thatcherite desire to pick and choose exactly what they want - and disregard what they don't want - even if such a set of choices isn't on the table - in order to stem the tide of other member nations and associates clamouring for the same new deal. Wow, I had way too many axes to grind for a single solitary sentence.
Well, precisely, this is what it comes down to: identity. Identity is a complicated thing, involving shared language, customs, ways of thinking. Spicing it up with immigration seems like a good plan to me, but it is like putting herbs and spices in a dish. You still want the dish to be recognisably what it was. Would you sooner have an authentic Italian pizza, or the globalised Pizza Hut version of it? It is interesting that this forum is a way of sharing identity. Wherever we may come from and whatever we may think, we still have Ducati ownership in common. But this is also a poor, commercially driven, brand loyal sort of community in some respects compared to the richness of real cultural identity. Mankind is a tribal animal and needs to belong to a family, a business family (workplace), a place and perhaps ultimately a country. It's just not realistic to expect him to belong uniquely to a global community, a sort of heterogenous mass. I like coming to the UK for all the things that are uniquely British about it - even if part of that modern-day Britishness has become multicultural inclusion. But I don't want Edinburgh to look like London, any more than I want Paris to look like Venice. Fact is, the motor of globalisation is money. If you let money decide everything, it will do what it does best - eliminate competition. Thus you will end up with only one music in one language, films uniquely from one town, TV from one country, and commercial imitations of original foods and drink to consume. You will also all dress the same. Much of this is already well underway: people wear t-shirts and jeans the world over. Is this homogenisation all making us a lot happier?
I read recently that the EU has free trade arrangements with over 50 countries outside of the EU so there is plenty of precedent for leaving trade duty free. I know for a fact from my own import/export business that it is not necessary to be a member for duty free trade. If the EU chooses to punish the Swiss they may well end up hurting themselves, the rule of unforeseen circumstances etc as practised magnificently by politicians the world over. I hope the Swiss authorities stand by the vote and don't do what the Irish did several years ago after the initial No vote there.
An ideological bonus of globalisation and free trade is that certain areas could produce things that they specialised in and could sell them to other countries with other specialities, creating more efficient, better developed products for consumers and a lower cost. The real-world negative of this open border idea is that people play the system to access better standards of state welfare. The system was planned well but collapsed under the smart thinking and loop hole finding humans subjected to it. From an economic point of view, and not from an ethnic or racial point of view, the system was broken from the start.
What I love about Swiss direct democracy is that the political class really are the servants of the People, the true masters. They now have to suck it up and deal with what the people actually want. The people send their minions, their politicians, to Brussels to negotiate on their behalf. No way would the politicians have voted for this. The Swiss are not part of the EU. They are a sovereign state and should very much be able to pick and choose what they like or don't, in dealing with the EU. Other nations will clamour for a new deal, inevitably, because the Swiss are not alone in terms of the problems they face or their attitude towards them. Cameron should be trying to negotiate his new deal now, and once that is in the pocket, turn it over to the people for ratification by an In or Out vote. There is no point having that vote, or debate, until the new vision of what Britain wants from the EU has been decided on, and has worked out how much of that vision it can get from Brussels.
One way of showing dominance is to totally ignore the upstart. In reality the Swiss vote could turn out to be more symbolic than real but even if it doesn't the EU could still just ignore the issue. Whether other nations see the Swiss vote as a turning point remains to be seen, most national potiticians are pro EU after all.
As always with these kinds of issues, the central point is about mutuality. Does Switzerland want Swiss people to be able to live and work freely throughout Europe, or not? If so, the same privilege must be extended to others on a mutual basis. Does Switzerland want to be able to buy and sell goods and services freely as part of the single market, or not? If so, the arrangement has to be a mutual one. If Switzerland chooses to isolate itself from the rest of Europe (and not for the first time), so be it - no-one else has anything to complain about. But if Switzerland thinks it can retain all the huge advantages for itself of being part of the world's best bloc, whilst conceding no advantages to any other country ...
When the Swiss people vote on something, that is either law or has to become law. There is no question of the politicians dragging their feet or not implementing the will of the people. The date by which immigration reverts to Swiss control was part of the text voted on. It's not a "would like to have"; it's law. If this means Switzerland being entirely isolated by Brussels, it will make no difference to that vote. There might be another popular initiative down the line which reverses the process in the light of the EU's reaction, but that would still have to be put to the people. This is how direct democracy works.
I think you might be confusing migration and free trade here Tom. Trade is what makes countries rich, globalisation concentrates wealth. Welfare is best managed at a local level for the reasons you state.
Slightly simplistic way of presenting the argument, Pete, in my view. The Swiss are delighted with the reciprocal trade agreements. Nothing needs to change there. They are also no doubt delighted that their nationals can work in EU countries. They are similarly delighted that EU nationals come and work here. What they are less delighted about is that considerably fewer Swiss find jobs in the EU than EU member nationals finding jobs in Switzerland. In a small country, that imbalance is unsustainable over time. The Swiss are not proposing to batten down the hatches and stop EU immigration. They are proposing that they control how much immigration into their own country there is and prevent salary dumping whereby people from neighbouring countries come and work at cut-rates at the expense of Swiss nationals. So it isn't a case of "conceding no advantages to any other country". Indeed, you only have to spend time here to encounter all the Italians, Portuguese, Spaniards et al and their offspring who were invited to work in the country decades before any Shengen agreement. If the relationship with the EU goes tits up, it will be because the EU deliberately chooses to amalgamate all bilateral agreements into one. Their tack has been, if the Swiss people won't vote to join the EU, we'll make it so that the differences between full membership and Swiss agreements is minimal. We'll have as much of our cake as we can eat.
Or maybe people with certain skills who can contribute positively to a country should be allowed to emigrate but those who don't should stay put ? Free trade and open borders are two separate issues.
