tzijlstra Posted June 28, 2016 Author Share Posted June 28, 2016 They promised to end free movement (apparently that's important to a lot of people), drastically reduce EU authority over UK law, stop sending them at least the bulk of the money we currently send, and to maintain good trading relations. That's not consistent with simple EEA membership. A Swiss-style bilateral agreement which gives single market access is the only plausible option. We shall have to see if the EU will agree to it. We have to be prepared to live without single market access, and the EU has to believe that we are, otherwise they'll walk all over our negotiators. Interesting times. The Swiss have free movement of Labour (it was a core condition of being allowed access to the single market) and more recently were made to sign up to the EU migration plan (which Britain did not do). The Swiss are slowly but surely adopting an awful lot of EU law and even have a government department to process it all and to run constant negotiations with the EU (which strikes me as more red tape, not less). And they send, albeit less in absolute terms still a considerable contribution per capita to the EU on a yearly basis. They are 1/9th the size of the UK in population. With regards to the EU believing the UK could/would want to live without single market access, have you checked the price of the GBP against the Euro? All the EU has to do in that case is wait. A year of uncertainty and the Pound will be worth less than the Euro, the deficit will grow to unsustainable levels and the people will realise that what they voted for isn't quite something they understood. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 (edited) The Swiss have free movement of Labour (it was a core condition of being allowed access to the single market) and more recently were made to sign up to the EU migration plan (which Britain did not do). Yes. That's the tough bit. I think the UK would accept qualified free movement, but it's not for me to say. The Swiss are slowly but surely adopting an awful lot of EU law and even have a government department to process it all and to run constant negotiations with the EU. And they send, albeit less in absolute terms still a considerable contribution per capita to the EU on a yearly basis. They are 1/9th the size of the UK in population. Do you have a figure for this? I can't find the specifics, but as far as I can see it's measured in billions, rather than tens of billions. Norway for example pays around £200m/year. Scale that by about a factor of 5 for the UK's higher GDP and you get £1bn/year. That's the gross though and it's only rough (could be out by a factor of 2 in either direction). Unless I've got my sums drastically wrong, we'd end up paying about 1/10th net of what we do now. Which I think the leave voters would accept as a win. With regards to the EU believing the UK could/would want to live without single market access, have you checked the price of the GBP against the Euro? All the EU has to do in that case is wait. A year of uncertainty and the Pound will be worth less than the Euro, the deficit will grow to unsustainable levels and the people will realise that what they voted for isn't quite something they understood. Waiting hurts them as well. But no I do not want to live without single market access if the price is reasonable to me. Switzerland is also free to make its own free trade agreements. It currently has 28 free trade agreements with 38 partners outside the EU and is working on more. The EU is well behind. Edited June 28, 2016 by unbeliever Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidley Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Angela Merkel has just announced that if we want to trade with the e.u, we must accept free movement within the e,u, I would say that, that condition goes against the referendum vote, it is widely accepted that free movement of labour within the e.u was a key feature within the no vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Angela Merkel has just announced that if we want to trade with the e.u, we must accept free movement within the e,u, I would say that, that condition goes against the referendum vote, it is widely accepted that free movement of labour within the e.u was a key feature within the no vote. I would expect her to say nothing else. Doesn't mean she'll stick to it, or even that she'll have much influence after she gets fired in about a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidley Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 hope you are right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phil752 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 Do you understand how politics work? To get legislation agreed in Europe it has to be voted on by MEPs. If a vote is likely to be close those MEPs will begin to negotiate with each other either to directly amend the legislation (by kicking it back to the Commission or Council and have them make acceptable changes) or to gain support for other legislation (If you vote for A, I will vote for B.). Works exactly the same in any democracy. So you voted to leave the single market? the point is that it start with the commission who are not elected, unless you are Saying Junker or his cronies , are elected by a vote of people in the EU Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unbeliever Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 hope you are right. I honestly don't care. If it were up to me, we'd give them free movement and in exchange further weaken their influence on UK law. But it's not up to me and curtailing free movement is important to a lot of leave voters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skink Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 all this 'grown up' debate is very interesting - thanks folks, I might not agree with all points but I think they are being presented in a thoughtful/meaningful manner my biggest concern remains leadership vacuum - who on earth have we got who is actually capable of delivering a decent deal for the UK now? (apols if that was sorted 30 pages ago!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted June 28, 2016 Author Share Posted June 28, 2016 Yes. That's the tough bit. I think the UK would accept qualified free movement, but it's not for me to say. I don't think it is an option, single market is free movement, it has been the founding principle from day one and the UK signed up to it, from day one. Do you have a figure for this? I can't find the specifics, but as far as I can see it's measured in billions, rather than tens of billions. Norway for example pays around £200m/year. Scale that by about a factor of 5 for the UK's higher GDP and you get £1bn/year. That's the gross though and it's only rough (could be out by a factor of 2 in either direction). Unless I've got my sums drastically wrong, we'd end up paying about 1/10th net of what we do now. Which I think the leave voters would accept as a win. No, it is actually quite well hidden, I tried the Swiss government pages, but I couldn't find the exact figure. I am also sure I once found a per capita breakdown of contributions to the EU but that seems to have gone, unless my Google-fu is leaving me. Waiting hurts them as well. But no I do not want to live without single market access if the price is reasonable to me. Switzerland is also free to make its own free trade agreements. It currently has 28 free trade agreements with 38 partners outside the EU and is working on more. The EU is well behind. It appears to be hurting the EU less than it is hurting the UK. As I said, the coming days are crucial, if the markets don't get some sort of signal that access to the single market is non-negotiable for the UK (ie. no matter what, it accepts that is the break-line) I can see a spectacular backlash develop. On the Swiss free trade agreements, not sure I would call them that, the Swiss live off international banking, they have treaties with countries around the world in relation to that. ---------- Post added 28-06-2016 at 12:28 ---------- all this 'grown up' debate is very interesting - thanks folks, I might not agree with all points but I think they are being presented in a thoughtful/meaningful manner my biggest concern remains leadership vacuum - who on earth have we got who is actually capable of delivering a decent deal for the UK now? (apols if that was sorted 30 pages ago!) It isn't sorted, the only thing we know is that it will be a Tory Prime Minister, to be elected by the Tory party. On a different note, just saw Farage's charade in the EU parliament, full of glee and rubbing the EU parliaments noses in it. I am fairly sure that has done the mood no favours whatsoever. If I was the UK I'd request a full withdrawal of MEPs from all affairs as the first step. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eater Sundae Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 The problem is that both options will be highly politically damaging. You alienate vast numbers of voters either way. As I say, for me and I suspect millions of others this will change my vote. The Brexiters will not forgive their win in the referendum being overturned. The remainers will I suspect forgive if there is a good deal and prosperity once it all settles down. Cameron doesn't have to face this tough decision so he's not going to. On a personal level, I'd be very happy if parliament decided to ignore the referendum, as I'd like us to stay in the EU, (and ideally to be a more committed member and not just moaning from the sidelines). However, it would be totally wrong at this stage. I don't believe they should, and I don't believe they will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts