Post a Comment Print Share on Facebook
Featured Norwegian Cruise Nebraska Big Data Analytics Thailand Gaetz


Cassis is stylized to the adversary

Mr Notter, Switzerland, the EU-again all or nothing. For what you are?
you See, the Treaty is the text on an institutional framework agreement complicated. Since you prefer to speak about the supposedly simpler, very big questions. The present design is a balanced one. You should sign the Treaty and ratify it.

According to the principle: eye supply?
not at All. Look at the negotiated text of the Treaty, but This is a good overall package was not to the detriment of Switzerland. On The Contrary.

your party, the SP, sees it differently.
Not only the SP. The whole debate is conducted in the EU-Dossier is currently at the wrong level. Instead of reading the text of the Treaty and to discuss the changes, talk to you about sovereignty, democracy, foreign judges...

...or, in the case of the SP: protection of Wages.
Yes. The SP finds that the negotiated framework agreement, the wage protection is inadequate.

And you?
I've been watching the argument with some degree of incomprehension.

"do not Stop, we will, we will prosper as the state contract for the settlement of the aircraft noise conflict."Markus Notter

The protection of Wages is not in line with the framework agreement, in the bucket, but is confirmed, in principle, explicitly. The registration deadline for EU companies which send their employees to Switzerland, and the obligation to pay a Deposit, however, are modified. Instead of eight days of the week it will be four days of work. New Switzerland is integrated into the internal market information system. This improves the effectiveness of the controls. Further protective measures can be taken, if you are proportionate.

The SP is not enough.
The unions managed to give the impression that the framework agreement violated fundamental values of the workforce. Federal councillor Ignazio Cassis is stylized to the neo-liberal adversary is high, the stick with the EU Commission under a blanket. Something a lot of honor. No discussion on an objective level. Everything is very abstract.

The fear of Lohndumpingist but very specific.
The unions forget that the worst wage dumping was caused by the Saisonnier-statut. This could be overcome only with the free movement of persons, so the supposedly neo-liberal idea of the internal market.

And the accompanying measures.
of Course. In the end, it is, nevertheless, what a picture you have of the EU. It was always perceived differently. Seen primarily as a political project for the Overcoming of nationalism, then it is stressed in the internal market. Whenever the Left, the EU is understood as a neoliberal project, she was against Integration. You think to the UK: The EU's opponents on the Left were there historically for a long time. Has rotated, the first end of the 80s, as the European Commission President and socialist Jacques Delors, declared the British trade unions, the EU as a System of social market economy.

And today, the Left discovered the protectionism?
The EU-are being drowned out friendly forces – also in Switzerland. This is a Problem. SP-President Christian Levrat and trade unions, Paul Rechsteiner argue with the welfare state and the demise of the social partnership. What is the social Democrat dares to say something EU-Friendly?

The SP simply wants to renegotiate. Because she is not alone.
you can try. To Negotiate but it needs always two.

does not Belong to the political Powerplay to lock for a long time, but in the end, but to continue to negotiate?
Why should enter the EU after years of negotiations, the Swiss claims? Because we were in the inner political discussion to the conclusion that we want to hold on to this and that? This framework agreement is now negotiated, and the result is we have to assess. Of course you can't come to the conclusion that the contract is passe. You can't just say: Now the negotiations continue.

but It is also irresponsible, an agreement to agree, in a referendum, little opportunities are given.
So you can not argue! Politics is influence, not an opinion survey. I am Convinced for one thing and not saying, in my opinion, it is, has no Chance.

Just as the Federal Council before it.
Yes, unfortunately. It is clear that As a government you will be prohibited to the negotiating partner completely implausible, if you negotiated for years with each other, but in the end: I don't know if I'm for or against, I'm now going to ask once. And then you come back to the negotiating table and says: The others have said, the contract was so good, I'll sign it now. As a government you have to have an attitude, just like you have to be represented as a party with Conviction, what you find is right.

The power of their party and splits the Enjoyed.
In terms of Federal elections in the autumn, I can understand the skeptical attitude of the framework agreement to Yes. If left and right do not say that the agreement comes into question, the framework agreement as a campaign issue. I suppose that the political Left will benefit.

In the urban, left-liberal Milieu to respond but many potential SP voters irritated.
This is so – and this may be looking for Alternatives. Here, the green liberals are now in Position.

How the SP can the EU in a Dilemma overcome?
The SP moves in the longer term, not good if it is for A themed party. Clearly, the labour party is taking and to stand up for their interests. This also makes them good. Questions of international cooperation, peacekeeping, the environment and climate protection inventory, however, also belong to the social democratic core. The party must be represented as a Whole with a certain degree of coherence, all of the political program points.

Makes the SP? Accession to the EU, for example, is still in the party program.
in the longer term, it will be with a national wage protection limited attitude but difficult to get back to a more open, EU-friendly course.

Would be an EU-accession for an Alternative to the bilateral path?
with Respect to accession to the EU, I think it is with Jakob Kellenberger, who has led as a chief negotiator at the time, the negotiations between the EU and Switzerland to the Bilateral I agreements. Kellenberger says that everyone who was opposed to membership of the EU-Switzerland, should give reasons. Of our geography, history and economy everything speaks for a membership. But the political reality is of course different: The SVP has succeeded in pushing the debate in the corner, that we can speak at most about the EEA as a possible Alternative to the framework agreement: a small accession to the EU without co-determination. The true Alternative to the framework agreement would be the membership.

Since you are not a lonely Position, especially since the EU itself is in excellent condition.
of Course, it is currently difficult to discuss our relationship with the EU. The debate ums framework agreement, I think, but also problematic, because the interests will not be analysed. You are doing incorrectly so, as if the framework agreement was a contract of sale: The EU wants to sell us something at a high price, and we want to pay as little as possible.

What is wrong with that?
In truth and In fact, it's going to be a mutualization of interests: The EU and Switzerland have a common interest to realize at least Parts of a common internal market. And the need for uniform rules. The framework agreement relates to five contracts, the securing of the Switzerland access to the European market. Just because the hard right is created. All other expectation statements for future negotiations.

you Talk about the contract? That's a pretty far-reaching integration is but a step.
of The framework contract does not oblige us to new market access agreement, but it allows for future contracts – such as the planned electricity agreement. Switzerland can say with any additional contract Yes or no. This is a relevant, but not a total change in our relationship with the EU. We speak of a logical further development of the Existing, partly with known elements. The dynamic legal adaptation about we in Schengen-Dublin. Now the political debate is running in a direction, where a party refuses to of the other flips and the agreement. If we don't stop this, we will prosper as the time of the state Treaty for the settlement of the airport noise dispute with Germany. Also, at the time, we thought we could get even more out of it. It is not more but better. The conflict is unresolved until today.


Created: 15.02.2019, 18:53 Uhr

Your Name
Post a Comment
Characters Left:
Your comment has been forwarded to the administrator for approval.×
Warning! Will constitute a criminal offense, illegal, threatening, offensive, insulting and swearing, derogatory, defamatory, vulgar, pornographic, indecent, personality rights, damaging or similar nature in the nature of all kinds of financial content, legal, criminal and administrative responsibility for the content of the sender member / members are belong.