Brexit4

So what do you think about what Boris wrote?
Personally, if he did write that, he's an idiot sending it to a friend instead of just shredding it.
Do we want such an idiot being in charge of foreign affairs?

Thought not.

No, it's in the i.

Did you make that up yourself, durhamjen?

Anyone else read Boris's final paragraph that was apparently missed off the article?

"OK, so it's best for the country to remain. And the remainers are set to win. But if I support Brexit and they narrowly lose I will get great publicity. And if, which I doubt, Brexit win, then I could get a job to implement it! Even as Foreign Secretary. Worse for the country, but win, win, win for me."

Not sure if this is the right thread, but never mind. It's about Brexit.

Indeed- when you join a Golf Club, a Church, a Bridge Society, etc- it is your responsibility to find out about the rules and conditions, and then to adhere to them. You can't expect the Club or Association to change the rules they all adhere to, just because you don't like them anymore. Can you imagine wanting to continue to play at your Golf Club, but with your rules and without paying your subs??? No, me neither.

Here is the speech by Nick Clegg today. He and Tim Farron seem to be the only ones talking any sense at the moment:

www.facebook.com/libdems/videos/10154647727058270/

... most people I know do not see this as a threat- but just the reality of the situation.

Sensible Swiss.

I really don't see how the EU asking people who wish to join the single market to accept their conditions can be interpreted as 'threatening'.

Perhaps Brexiteers are secretly longing for a bit of punishment...

In the meantime, UK expats in Switzerland, who already are on very high salaries most of them- are laughing all the way to their Swiss bank- and buying properties galore in the UK. Their salaries jumped about 40% a few years back when the Swiss Franc was 'realigned' to the Euro- and now another 16-20% since Brexit. They have therefore gained between 55% to 60% on their already very high salaries vis à vis the £ Sterling (btw exactly the reverse for us- who have lost the same amount and are now at about 40% of the income we had 7 years ago).

Did anyone listen to Nick Clegg's speech today on food prices and the farming industry? He and Tim Farron seem to be the only ones making sense at all at the moment.

Pogs, it is very difficult to answer your questions re Switzerland. It is a very small countra, but extremely diverse, and the attitude of the German speakers in general is much more 'Teutonic' and conservative, than the FRench speaking part where I live. As said Basel Town often votes with the French speakers, as it did on that occasion, and often Zurich too- but the rest of the German parts are still very rural and conservative. Strangely enough, as in France and in the UK too- the more rural parts, where immigration is very small by comparison- tend to be more anti-immigrants (fear of the unknown and all that, and fear of their traditional ways being affected). They are also 'led' by the UDC, which is very focivorous in their campaigns, and backed by a few very rich industrialist. Poster campaigns included pictures of 'white sheep kicking out a black sheep from the pasture, a Kosovo looking man with a gold chain saying he is likely to be racist, a woman in traditional Muslim dress with bomb coming out of her clothing, and so forth. And also by regular newspapers full of fear mongering and clearly racist stuff, put though each door on regular basis.

And just as in the UK now, with about the same % voting for and against, almost neck and neck, but with the 'limit immigration' just winning, so nearly half and half (as with Brexit) - the Swiss are bitterly divided. Young versus old, FRench against Germans, rural against academics, and so on. The situation is soso similar, albeit different, to what is going on in the UK now- and we are experiencing a very uncomfortable feeling of terribly 'déjà vu'. The was our respective Governments is very very different though- and at the moment, we just don't know exactly what is going on behind closed door.

All we know, is that the Swiss GVT has been working non stop since the Feb 14 vote to try and get a compromise with the EU. They were getting very close- but the EU panicked about Brexit- as they knew that if they compromised with Switzerland, the UK would use this as a precedent- they therefore had to backtrack and say a very firm NO- either you are part of the single market (providing you pay large sums of money and agree to have no say whatsoever with the rules and laws of the EU) or NOT. If you want to be part, then free movement of people is part and parcel of it- and there is no compromise possible.

You ask if the Swiss feel angry with the EU for 'threatening them'. I can't tell you about Switzerland as a whole- here where I live, where we rely totally on exports of quality watches and precision engineering- most people I know do not see this as a threat- but just the reality of the situation. We agree to be part of reciprocal agreements and single market within a framework of certain conditions. It is only fair that those conditions are adhered to. We do have the choice, to leave the single market, if we don't like the conditions at the end of the day. In my part of Switzerland, it would be sheer madness- most people can see that. The Swiss Franc is so high- and it is hard enough to be competitive as it is. Common sense.

bags OK I will try to reply to your implied criticism of my little post about the poor.
So the argument is that a fall in sterling will help the economy long term.

Who benefits from a weaker £?
1. Firms selling goods abroad. This very much depends on demand elsewhere in the world, and we know that at the moment that the world economy is weak. Lower prices might not be sufficient to lead to a higher demand for U.K. Products
British goods also tend to be of the higher end in value and are less susceptible to price fluctuation. The same applies to services which makes up an enormous amount of our exports.
2 current a/c deficit -trade balance may improve given 1above works
3 Less than 10% of U.K. Companies export. Some may be flexible enough to shift to export.
4 1992 and ERM - devaluation then helped economic growth with low inflation, because the economy was depressed. The conditions are not the same now as then
Reduced capital flow. Because of the uncertainty over Brexit there will be less inward investment. This may magnify the fall of sterling.

Losers
Imported goods will be/are more expensive. We know that food represents a large part of this. For every 10% of devaluation, prices tend to rise by 3%. Fuel, gas and air travel are amongst other considerations.
Holidays abroad
Raw materials for manufactured goods.
Fruit and veg producers which is labour intensive, may move abroad because of lack of cheap labour.
Exports may not benefit as productivity growth is relatively low in the U.K.

Have to stop now as this is time wasting!!!
I've just thrown this together so a bit raggedy! -and incomplete. But you get my drift?

It will be I retesting to see what the Italian Referendum outcome will be in December.

I did agree with Larry Elliot to some extent in that I have been worried for a long time that an economy which seems to depend on property price inflation and high levels of consumer debt was bound to come a cropper again, just as it did 8 years ago.

But I also agree with many of the commenters who pointed out that a controlled devaluation was one thing but a wholesale slide in the value of the pound prompted by loss of confidence engendered by the Leave vote and subsequent pronouncements by the Prime minister was not a Good Thing. And this before we have even left the EU.

There are actually some quite interesting comments to read on this article; if you have the time to wade through the usual anti- Guardian trolls.

I think that's what the article is doing, isn't it? I presume even "the poor" agree that a strong economy is a good thing for the country. Wealth sharing, which I think might be what made you make the remark you did make, ww, is a related but separate issue.

Wealth that doesn't exist can't be shared. I don't think it's necessary to assume that it's only rich people who "produce" things or services that help the economy.

Hmm! Tell that to the poor

Interesting article in the Guardian yesterday, by Larry Elliott arguing that the fall of the pound sterling in foreign exchanges need not be a bad thing. He argues that it could make our economy less dependent on consumerism and make more of our producers to the benefit of all. Sounds good to me

Thanks for trying, dj but it was altogether different. The Guardian article you've linked to doesn't mention the cost of bribing Nissan to stay, nor does it mention the possibility of paying into the EU to preserve passporting.

I was so pleased to have found a non Guardian article, too...

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/13/brexit-britain-cost-divorce-bill-questions-answered-uk

Is this what you mean, MaisieD?
Different paper, but possibly the same figures?

granjura

Thank you for replying.

I understand the referendum is binding so what is the feeling of the Swiss people when threatened by the EU

"In theory, Switzerland can unilaterally impose the quotas. However, this is likely to 'provoke retaliation from the EU' which could result in reduced market access to the EU for Swiss firms. Ultimately, migration and trade are closely bound together in the Swiss relationship with the EU."

Will Switzerland go against the people to appease the EU.?

Will Switzerland dare to go against the EU over Free Movement of People at the expense of trade.?

What is the current mood?

Has the referendum decision slowly died a death or is it still an ongoing dispute?

www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jul/03/eu-swiss-single-market-access-no-free-movement-citizens

Switzerland's referendum has created a very similar position to the UK to some degree and that's why I keep saying the Free Movement of People mantra,panacea, enshrinement in the EU need for 'Ever Closer Union' a 'Federal Europe' is now a stumbling block to sanity prevailing when it comes to membership and trade within and outside the European Union for countries such as Switzerland and the UK and others.

Sorry, the FT have whipped the article I linked to behind their paywall. It wasn't when I read it. Now I can't see it either as I won't pay for a Murdoch paper.

In my region, only 38 % voted in favour of the Referendum, about the same for the other French speaking Cantons and Basel- that always tend to vote with the French speaking areas.

Sorry Pogs - sometimes a thread disappears, and i've been quite busy. I thought I did write about the SWiss Referendum of February 2014. It was also a very very close vote, and those who wanted to limit immigration were mainly the traditional Swiss Germans Cantons- the French speaking part, Romandie, where I was born and raised and where we live now in retirement- was clearly against- because they were aware that it would clash directly with the EU reciprocal agreements, of which it was part.

A Referendum in Switzerland is binding, unlike in the UK where it is advisory. The Swiss Government has normally 2 years to put a new law into place after a Referendum- and it is a real mess. Switzerland has just too much to lose if reciprocal trade agreements fail. AGain, as in the Uk with Brexit, there was a real young/old divide- but it has become clear since that many yung people didn't bother to vote - and then took to the streets, FaceBook and Twitter to say 'the old have sold us down the river'.

The divide between FRench and German speaking Cantons is still huge- and between young and old too. And we still have no idea what will happen- but it is a real concern. So far the answer from the EU has been clear- you want reciprocal agreements- then free movement of people is part and aprcel of this.

Switzerland is a tiny country, with large numbers of immigrants- in the 20C from Italy, Spain and Portugal- and then from Kosovo and Bosnia, and now from all over the world.
We also have borders with FRance, Germany, Italy- with 1000s and 1000s of cross border workers.

As long as the people, democratically represented in parliament by their respective MP, get to debate consider and decide on the negotiating points everything else doesn't matter as these negotiations will have the backing of the entire country and this will undoubtedly strengthen the UKs negotiators hand.

However to go to Brussels without this support would be foolish indeed.

Granjura You posted this last Wednesday to which I responded but heard no more from you.

"The UK wants its cake and eat it- and it is not vindictive of other partners to say 'no way'... Why should other EU countries, including Switzerland, and Norway, have to agree to have freedom of movement for members- and not the UK. Why oh why?

I posted in response to your personal post to myself.

'Has the EU demanded/imposed on Canada /USA for example the Free Movement of People? Obviously not as they are not members of the club, as the UK will no longer be members under the terms and conditions that apply now.

As for Switzerland and Norway my understanding is 'The Free Movement of People' is becoming a contentious issue , indeed many EU countries are not happy with the 'Free Movement of People' , or do you disagree.

'Switzerland is not a member of the EU, but the bilateral Free Movement of Persons Agreement has removed restrictions on EU citizens wishing to live or work in Switzerland. The citizens of Bulgaria and Romania will remain subject to restrictions until 31 May 2016 at the latest. Croatians are currently subject to a quota system.

In a referendum in February 2014, the Swiss voted to introduce quotas on EU migrants from 2017. Such quotas would violate the terms of Switzerland’s free movement treaty with the EU. In fact, the EU has so far refused to agree to Swiss quotas for EU migrants and has threatened to suspend other EU-Swiss bilateral agreements with the country if Switzerland unilaterally imposes quotas. The EU-Swiss free movement treaty is linked to agreements on technical barriers to trade, public procurement, aSwitzerl transport, civil aviation, and research by a so-called ‘guillotine clause’. This means they can only take effect together, and if one of the agreements is terminated the other six would cease to apply.

In theory, Switzerland can unilaterally impose the quotas. However, this is likely to 'provoke retaliation from the EU' which could result in reduced market access to the EU for Swiss firms. Ultimately, migration and trade are closely bound together in the Swiss relationship with the EU.

I am minded of the considered comment 'provoke retaliation from the EU'.

I will stick like glue to my thought the 'Free Movement of People' mantra/panacea/enshrinement in the EU need for 'Ever Closer Union' a 'Federal Europe' is now a stumbling block to sanity prevailing when it comes to membership and trade within and outside the European Union for countries such as Switzerland and the UK and others too where we see and hear voices of discontent , the UK had a vote however.'

What do you think about the EU/Swiss Free Movement Treaty and the call by Switzerland for 'quotas'. What is the update , what is the feeling by the Swiss people with regard to the EU. Interested to hear your thought.

Well it won't let me access it.

It's not paywalled*. That's why I posted a link instead of copy & pasting some of it.
It's not speculation, it's reporting on govt. discussions.

(*well, it wasn't when I read it)

What with paying Nissan to stay here and paying the EU to passport financial services there's not going to be much of that £350million left for the NHS...