Jump to content

EU Referendum - How will you vote?

Havanaclub
 Share

Do you think that the UK should remain a member of the EU?  

530 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you think that the UK should remain a member of the EU?

    • YES
      169
    • NO
      361

Recommended Posts

L00b Experienced

L00b

Posted
Posted (edited)
It seems the majority of us in the real world are considering voting out.
Depends which real world you're talking about ;)

 

Much of the pro-Brexit business ('real') world is banking on the UK getting an EEA/EFTA-but better-like deal with the EU. Here's why it won't happen, and here's how the EU would 'lump' the Brexiting UK with Switzerland, complete with freedom of movement and the core body of EU legislation (the "acquis communautaire"), minus financial passporting rights (which are the quasi-sole reason the City enjoys so much business from the Swiss currently, and which business the City would therefore lose, to Germany and/or Dublin).

 

Amongst the four example countries of Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland, the first three are EEA/EFTA, and only Switzerland is EFTA only.

 

The EEA treaty includes free movement with the EU, so EEA membership automatically involves that. Accordingly I can't see a Brexiting UK going for EEA, it would be orders of magnitude worse than cutting one's nose to spite one's face (because retaining all the disadvantages of the EU membership, but losing all of the advantages).

 

Free movement for Switzerland, on the other hand, is provided by EU-Switzerland bilateral agreements, not by the EFTA agreement. So although, factually, there's free movement between all the EFTA states and the EU, that free movement is not something that joining EFTA entails, but has been negotiated separately by the only non-EEA EFTA state (Switzerland).

 

However, the likelihood of getting an EFTA deal, which is not the same as Single Market access, are slim to none. The other EU countries have made it clear that individually crafted bilateral deals are not somewhere they want to go, or even stay:

The EU has made clear that it wants to move on from just negotiating individual treaties. In July 2010, European Council President Herman van Rompuy warned Switzerland that it must take up the EU's legal framework – the acquis communautaire – if it wants to access the market.
The UK's importance as a market to the rest of the EU is often brought out as a reason why this won't apply to the UK: Switzerland is the EU's 3rd market after the USA and China, which is the position that the UK would occupy in the event of Brexit.

 

Accordingly that will be the EU's negotiating backstop: that access to the EU market is conditional on accepting the acquis, which includes free movement.

 

What might happen in the event of Brexit is that the current moves towards a "cooperation agreement" with Switzerland would be broadened to include the UK, so that relations between the EU and both countries would be governed by the same agreement: either way, adoption of the acquis, including free movement, will be a non-negotiable part of the deal.

 

The EU showed this, when the recent Swiss referendum result breached the bilateral agreements.

Edited by L00b
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Blackbeard Rising Star

Blackbeard

Posted
Posted
Depends which real world you're talking about ;)

 

Much of the pro-Brexit business ('real') world is banking on the UK getting an EEA/EFTA-but better-like deal with the EU. Here's why it won't happen, and here's how the EU would 'lump' the Brexiting UK with Switzerland, complete with freedom of movement and the core body of EU legislation (the "acquis communautaire"), minus financial passporting rights (which are the quasi-sole reason the City enjoys so much business from the Swiss currently, and which business the City would therefore lose, to Germany and/or Dublin).

 

Amongst the four example countries of Norway, Iceland, Liechtenstein and Switzerland, the first three are EEA/EFTA, and only Switzerland is EFTA only.

 

The EEA treaty includes free movement with the EU, so EEA membership automatically involves that. Accordingly I can't see a Brexiting UK going for EEA, it would be orders of magnitude worse than cutting one's nose to spite one's face (because retaining all the disadvantages of the EU membership, but losing all of the advantages).

 

Free movement for Switzerland, on the other hand, is provided by EU-Switzerland bilateral agreements, not by the EFTA agreement. So although, factually, there's free movement between all the EFTA states and the EU, that free movement is not something that joining EFTA entails, but has been negotiated separately by the only non-EEA EFTA state (Switzerland).

 

However, the likelihood of getting an EFTA deal, which is not the same as Single Market access, are slim to none. The other EU countries have made it clear that individually crafted bilateral deals are not somewhere they want to go, or even stay:

The UK's importance as a market to the rest of the EU is often brought out as a reason why this won't apply to the UK: Switzerland is the EU's 3rd market after the USA and China, which is the position that the UK would occupy in the event of Brexit.

 

Accordingly that will be the EU's negotiating backstop: that access to the EU market is conditional on accepting the acquis, which includes free movement.

 

What might happen in the event of Brexit is that the current moves towards a "cooperation agreement" with Switzerland would be broadened to include the UK, so that relations between the EU and both countries would be governed by the same agreement: either way, adoption of the acquis, including free movement, will be a non-negotiable part of the deal.

 

The EU showed this, when the recent Swiss referendum result breached the bilateral agreements.

 

Sadly there are very few amicable divorces.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ricgem2002 Proficient

ricgem2002

Posted
Posted
Whether or not his employees are claiming in work benefits he should still be paying them the minimum wage. As his friend you should point out the penalties he may incur should he be found to be breaking the law.

but they will be working the hours it suits to claim these in work benefits with being paid minimum wage:roll: I think he copying a lot of these multi national companies they seem to get away with it :suspect:

 

---------- Post added 23-05-2016 at 15:20 ----------

 

actually it probably is, low paid workers tend to spend their money locally which keeps the local economy going

 

even when they taking out of the system hows that work then :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.