Read this article in English.
For Nigel Farage, it is quite simple. “The people of Norway and Switzerland are happy,” says the head of the UK Independence Party UKIP: “Your countries have a deal with the EU and this assures them of the trade relations that they really want.”
It is a Standard message from Farage. His party calls as part of the Conservatives, Britain should leave the European Union. They want the Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union. On June 23, the British vote on and show current surveys: It is probably very limited.The government of David Cameron warns of massive economic losses, the citizens should vote in favor of the Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union. Reine scaremongering is the scold his opponents. Switzerland and Norway are ultimately not in the EU – and the two countries go it excellent
The argument sounds interesting at first.. Could the British their special status, of which they already have in many areas of the EU in any case, still perfect and mutate into a “Switzerland with nuclear weapons”? So be there economically and militarily, but go the bureaucracy and the regulations from Brussels out of the way?
But as charming as it may seem for many Britons: The mind games are an illusion. The Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union advocates make their followers against something. Neither the Norwegian nor the Swiss model is even remotely realistic for Britain.
Relatively easy it can be shown at the Norway. The Scandinavians have refused twice to become a member of the EU. Norway is a member of since 1994 the European Economic Area (EEA). This came into force in 1994 and opened its members the internal market with its 500 million consumers.
The Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union advocates embezzled the reference to Norway, however, the price Oslo paid for the benefits of the single market: EEA members must deposit in the European Cohesion Fund, be balanced with the social differences in the EU. Norway also participates in a number of other EU programs and transfers for the same sums as the Member States.
Overall, so get more than 850 million euros a year together. When we look to how much money the UK receives from the EU, Norway pays per citizen nearly as much as the United Kingdom. When you consider that 66 percent of the payments flow back to the island because of the British rebate, the Norwegians are charged in proportion significantly more for their Light membership.
“The economic irrationality is frightening”
In addition: Norway must accept numerous EU rules such as the free movement of workers, without representation in the European institutions to have , Should the UK so leave the EU and join the EEA, the country would have to pay more, accept the unpopular rules from Brussels on – and would have no chance to negotiate the conditions for the internal market
“The. British would lose its influence in the EU, but would all follow rules, “says Dennis Snower, head of the Institute for world economy in Kiel. The American has nearly 20 years in London lived and researched, the “economic irrationality of Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union advocates” he calls “frightening”.
Also, the reference to the Swiss model holds Snower for a “fantasy, which is completely unrealistic “. Feelings rather than facts, so loud the strategy of opponents of the EU.
Switzerland is not a member of the EEA, but acted in the past 25 years more than 120 bilateral agreements with the EU. So the Swiss may largely benefit from EU free trade – but not, for example in financial services. That would be for Britain a big problem, after all, the financial sector has a vital importance for the British economy. In addition, Switzerland also assumes ongoing European rules to ensure compatibility with the EU, but no say.
has The British can not have everything
Switzerland’s status would the British hardly rich, says Stephan Breitenmoser, European Law at the University of Basel. These come that it is very difficult to conclude individual agreements with the EU. “The more specific the single area, the more complicated it is,” said Breitenmoser. That Britain therefore actually within two years – until an exit could become a reality – would reach that status, Switzerland has, is difficult to see
Especially as the EU is likely to have little interest in the British similar concessions. to make as little Switzerland. For example, Switzerland’s agreements with the EU in the context of free movement of workers are static. That is, until 1 July 1995, the Swiss have taken all EU rules in this area. Everything that Brussels has decided afterwards that Switzerland did not have to automatically accept, but could negotiate. At present, the future of this special status is uncertain, however, because Switzerland wants to set annual quantitative limits for immigrants.
“The static contracts are for the EU because of the rapid development of the law hardly useful,” says European Law Breitenmoser. He considers it unthinkable that Brussels would conclude such agreements with the UK.
It is clear that the British can not have everything. Self political turn away from the EU, while retaining all the economic benefits of the internal market, will not work.Also read / More on Proposed referendum on United Kingdom membership of the European Union:
editorial by DER SPIEGEL and SPIEGEL ONLINE: Who is wise remains
English Editorial: It’s smarter to stay
In the new digital SPIEGEL:
No comments:
Post a Comment