Our politicians, all of a sudden mannered

The tie just will not be the way it would have been Luzi Stamm. He tugs and tugs, but the node remains wrong. "Today is a significant mess potential," says SVP-national Council from the Canton Aargau, the hands on the collar, the view in the hall of the media centre in Bern, where else, the press conferences of the Federal Council to take place.

this afternoon the hall is reserved for the members of the foreign policy Commission of the national Council (APK), the journalists must remain behind a glass window in the vestibule. For the first Time in 16 years, a parliamentary Commission is holding a public hearing, streamed over the Internet, from the television broadcast live. Possible this type of Public in 1991, the few public hearings that were previously held mostly in the 90s. The F/A-18 fighter jet, the mad cow disease or genetic protection. Always, if a topic is very controversial, if it is "of great importance for our country," as President of the Commission, Elisabeth Schneider-Schneiter (CVP, BL) says in the Welcome later.

What's the Deal the EU-Switzerland is good? The whole Video of the debate. Video: Youtube

In the days before the hearing, Schneider-Schneiter gave a lot of Interviews, and in all she seemed a little stressed. Not a few observers expressed the fear that the hearing become a media spectacle, to the spiteful Repartee, and the extension of the national Council's battle zone. "The temptation may be for one or the other politician to use the occasion to raise its own profile," wrote the NZZ and meant including SVP national councillor Roger Köppel.

Where is Cassis?

Köppel is to open up the afternoon. He has in the short term, taken over the Lead of the SVP Delegation in the APK. By Luzi Stamm, and "the Express wish of the Public", as root, with now directed tie button and a difficult-to-interpretable Grin says. After the detailed introduction of the President of the Commission ("The questions please short. This is not a debate. This is a hearing!") may Köppel ask the first question. He uses his appearance to complain about the absence of the foreign Minister, Ignazio Cassis. "At a public hearing, the policy-makers must be present."

Köppel can, he says, it is not even particularly toxic, and then presents his question to Carl Baudenbacher, the former President of the Efta court. Baudenbacher is one of six experts this afternoon, next to him the Europe sit right Professor Christa Tobler and Astrid Epiney, EU law Professor Matthias Oesch, the former Ambassador Paul Widmer and Marc Bros de Puechredon, head of the economic research Institute BAK Economics.

"The court of arbitration is a Fig leaf."Carl Baudenbacher, former President of the Efta court of justice

it Quickly becomes clear that the fears were unnecessary. None of the others, the politicians, the statements of the speakers in uncommented. Politically, the introductory words are charged at the most, and politically, the decision who you want the question is. During the civil members follow Widmer and Baudenbacher, the comment is rather critical to the agreement, Tobler and Epiney, rather a positive effect to the agreement set, especially from the left.

"The EU, Switzerland also has not achieved everything you wanted. It is a compromise."Christa Tobler, Professor of European law at the University of Basel, Switzerland

in terms of Content, the biggest Surprise is not what is being discussed. But, what is not. For months, the framework agreement will be evaluated almost exclusively under the aspect of the accompanying measures for the protection of the Swiss wages, but now, three hours comes to be as good as nothing. The 8-day rule, which has shaken the country for half a year as upsurge, is not even mentioned.

the SP-the national councils want to know from the experts many things, but nothing to Deposit duties or labour market controls. This afternoon, within the SP, for once, not the noisy trade unionists, the political air superiority. But in Europe, there are politicians such as Eric Nussbaumer, Fabian Molina and Martin Naef, for which Switzerland's relations with the EU, as accompanying measures.

Instead, it is mainly talked about the dynamic right to takeover: in the Future, Switzerland should adopt new EU legislation, in principle. Nevertheless, the Law is not taking over "automatically," explains Professor Oesch. The Parliament, but also the people might say to a new legal text from Brussels at any time "no". In this case, Switzerland would have to be against the EU's actions, which must be according to the framework agreement, although on a proportionate basis, until the suspension of the person concerned a bilateral Treaty.

"I see dangers for federalism and direct democracy."Paul Widmer, lecturer at the University of St. Gallen and a former Ambassador to

A constant "sword of Damocles" is this criticised Old Ambassador Widmer. He warns that in the future, in every vote an all-or-nothing. To such a framework agreement", we say Yes," says Widmer.

A dispute among the experts

The proponents argue. Firstly, The framework agreement bring to Switzerland more say in the development of EU law. Secondly, The EU could not, in the future, simply block the Updating of the agreement on technical barriers to trade. Today, the Switzerland of the power policy of the EU was delivered, says Epiney. In the future, should also keep the Union in pre-defined legal procedures. These extend to the dispute resolution before an arbitration court.

"The Tribunal will only come very rarely."Astrid Epiney, Professor for European law at the University of Freiburg.

Against this arbitration court, Carl Baudenbacher moves the heavy artillery. A "sham arbitration" was a "Fig leaf". When it arrived, had to seek the arbitration court, the requirements of the European court of justice (ECJ). Astrid Epiney replied that the arbitral Tribunal decide for themselves, whether it is the ECJ calls or not.

It is not the last Time that the experts contradict each other. The one truth, the great clarity of the framework agreement, it is not there, even after these three hours. Nevertheless, the Parties – with the exception of the SVP, which speaks of a "shameful spectacle" in France, are agreed that the three of them were precious hours. President of the Commission, Schneider-Schneiter is happy. Your colleagues would have "followed the rules" says you, the Experiment came with the transparency, since well. "The goal was achieved."

(editing Tamedia)

Created: 15.01.2019, 21:10 Uhr