I voted leave but hope we have a Switzerland type deal
When it comes to immigration I believe the supply must meet the demand, and as such the UK government are to blame for not building enough houses to meet the demand, not creating enough school places and making teaching an attractive profession, not improving public transport and infrastructure, not improving the NHS and keeping our doctors here and not implementing good social policies and controls to allow new migrants to integrate with very little issues.
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
1. We can implement a unilateral safeguard so that supply can meet the demand
2. We should have a set of bilateral trade agreements with the EU
3. We can open ourselves up to the wider world even with the agreement above
4. It will allow the EU to move forward with its political aims without us
5. It will add stability to the markets in both the UK and Europe
6. We should push for more devolution in our regions as Switzerland has done
7. We are one of the founding members of EFTA before joining the EEC in 73
8. There will only be a partial application of EU law
9. Outside the CAP and CFP
10. Smaller contributions to the EU budget per capita
We should not see this as wanting to leave the European street, but wanting to become next door neighbours rather than roommates. We do not have the same outlook as the EU but that doesn't mean we need to sulk and leave completely.
An EFTA type deal, as Dan Hannan has alluded to, is in the interests of all parties moving forward in terms of both political and economic aims. This is the most sensible, least damaging and best option for us.
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
1. We can implement a unilateral safeguard so that supply can meet the demand
2. We should have a set of bilateral trade agreements with the EU
3. We can open ourselves up to the wider world even with the agreement above
4. It will allow the EU to move forward with its political aims without us
5. It will add stability to the markets in both the UK and Europe
6. We should push for more devolution in our regions as Switzerland has done
7. We are one of the founding members of EFTA before joining the EEC in 73
8. There will only be a partial application of EU law
9. Outside the CAP and CFP
10. Smaller contributions to the EU budget per capita
We should not see this as wanting to leave the European street, but wanting to become next door neighbours rather than roommates. We do not have the same outlook as the EU but that doesn't mean we need to sulk and leave completely.
An EFTA type deal, as Dan Hannan has alluded to, is in the interests of all parties moving forward in terms of both political and economic aims. This is the most sensible, least damaging and best option for us.
Scroll to see replies
Same but many leave voters who voted almost entirely on the basis of immigration will be angered by this. This is one of the worst aspects of the leave campaign imo because they know damn well if they want a good economic deal they're going to have to keep free movement. I mean without it we probably wouldn't have had leave winning, but I'm pretty uncomfortable with the manner of victory
Original post by welshiee
When it comes to immigration I believe the supply must meet the demand, and as such the UK government are to blame for not building enough houses to meet the demand, not creating enough school places and making teaching an attractive profession, not improving public transport and infrastructure, not improving the NHS and keeping our doctors here and not implementing good social policies and controls to allow new migrants to integrate with very little issues.
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
1. We can implement a unilateral safeguard so that supply can meet the demand
2. We should have a set of bilateral trade agreements with the EU
3. We can open ourselves up to the wider world even with the agreement above
4. It will allow the EU to move forward with its political aims without us
5. It will add stability to the markets in both the UK and Europe
6. We should push for more devolution in our regions as Switzerland has done
7. We are one of the founding members of EFTA before joining the EEC in 73
8. There will only be a partial application of EU law
9. Outside the CAP and CFP
10. Smaller contributions to the EU budget per capita
We should not see this as wanting to leave the European street, but wanting to become next door neighbours rather than roommates. We do not have the same outlook as the EU but that doesn't mean we need to sulk and leave completely.
An EFTA type deal, as Dan Hannan has alluded to, is in the interests of all parties moving forward in terms of both political and economic aims. This is the most sensible, least damaging and best option for us.
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
1. We can implement a unilateral safeguard so that supply can meet the demand
2. We should have a set of bilateral trade agreements with the EU
3. We can open ourselves up to the wider world even with the agreement above
4. It will allow the EU to move forward with its political aims without us
5. It will add stability to the markets in both the UK and Europe
6. We should push for more devolution in our regions as Switzerland has done
7. We are one of the founding members of EFTA before joining the EEC in 73
8. There will only be a partial application of EU law
9. Outside the CAP and CFP
10. Smaller contributions to the EU budget per capita
We should not see this as wanting to leave the European street, but wanting to become next door neighbours rather than roommates. We do not have the same outlook as the EU but that doesn't mean we need to sulk and leave completely.
An EFTA type deal, as Dan Hannan has alluded to, is in the interests of all parties moving forward in terms of both political and economic aims. This is the most sensible, least damaging and best option for us.
You won't get it, Switzerland is land-locked between three major EU countries, plus it takes more migrants on average than the UK, plus the manner in which the UK left has certainly placed a nail the final coffin that is the UK.
We aren't leaving the EU.
They don't have the guts to activate article 50
If they give us a Switzerland like deal, why not just give every member of the EU a Switzerland like deal ?
They don't have the guts to activate article 50
If they give us a Switzerland like deal, why not just give every member of the EU a Switzerland like deal ?
Original post by democracyforum
We aren't leaving the EU.
They don't have the guts to activate article 50
If they give us a Switzerland like deal, why not just give every member of the EU a Switzerland like deal ?
They don't have the guts to activate article 50
If they give us a Switzerland like deal, why not just give every member of the EU a Switzerland like deal ?
Because most of them are inside the Eurozone and the only way a single currency can work is with more integrated institutions.
However if the UK is outside it does beg the question for the likes of Sweden, Denmark, what is the point of the existing EU arrangement for countries that aren't in the Eurozone, most of the decisions will be made in the interests of the Eurozone countries and whilst the UK was at least a big fish outside the Eurozone, for the remaining non-Eurozone countries in the EU it may be that they have to move towards similar agreements to Switzerland.
Original post by welshiee
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
1. We can implement a unilateral safeguard so that supply can meet the demand
2. We should have a set of bilateral trade agreements with the EU
3. We can open ourselves up to the wider world even with the agreement above
4. It will allow the EU to move forward with its political aims without us
5. It will add stability to the markets in both the UK and Europe
6. We should push for more devolution in our regions as Switzerland has done
7. We are one of the founding members of EFTA before joining the EEC in 73
8. There will only be a partial application of EU law
9. Outside the CAP and CFP
10. Smaller contributions to the EU budget per capita
We should not see this as wanting to leave the European street, but wanting to become next door neighbours rather than roommates. We do not have the same outlook as the EU but that doesn't mean we need to sulk and leave completely.
An EFTA type deal, as Dan Hannan has alluded to, is in the interests of all parties moving forward in terms of both political and economic aims. This is the most sensible, least damaging and best option for us.
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
1. We can implement a unilateral safeguard so that supply can meet the demand
2. We should have a set of bilateral trade agreements with the EU
3. We can open ourselves up to the wider world even with the agreement above
4. It will allow the EU to move forward with its political aims without us
5. It will add stability to the markets in both the UK and Europe
6. We should push for more devolution in our regions as Switzerland has done
7. We are one of the founding members of EFTA before joining the EEC in 73
8. There will only be a partial application of EU law
9. Outside the CAP and CFP
10. Smaller contributions to the EU budget per capita
We should not see this as wanting to leave the European street, but wanting to become next door neighbours rather than roommates. We do not have the same outlook as the EU but that doesn't mean we need to sulk and leave completely.
An EFTA type deal, as Dan Hannan has alluded to, is in the interests of all parties moving forward in terms of both political and economic aims. This is the most sensible, least damaging and best option for us.
I think this suggestion sounds sensible on the face of it.
The problems would be that the EU won't like point 1. The Swiss voted in a referendum to put quotas on migration but the EU have said if they impose them then their single market access agreements will be invalid.
The EU also has had a lot of arguments with Switzerland about this so they are unlikely to let us go down that road. Also we would want to go further than Switzerland because they don't have passport for financial services so their banks have to locate inside the EU, and thats a real problem for us.
I think we might have to offer up full free movement to start talking of a Swiss type deal.
Original post by MagicNMedicine
I think we might have to offer up full free movement to start talking of a Swiss type deal.
I think we might have to offer up full free movement to start talking of a Swiss type deal.
It would still be completely worth it for me.
Original post by welshiee
When it comes to immigration I believe the supply must meet the demand, and as such the UK government are to blame for not building enough houses to meet the demand, not creating enough school places and making teaching an attractive profession, not improving public transport and infrastructure, not improving the NHS and keeping our doctors here and not implementing good social policies and controls to allow new migrants to integrate with very little issues.
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
The best solution is to join EFTA and then move forward on that basis. Why would this be a good thing?
Your first point is spot on. And has nothing to do with the EU. Migrants are coming to the country and getting jobs. Employment is at very low levels compared with recent times, so you might say demand and supply are about right. But it is fair to say that the government should have invested more in areas of high immigration.
That said, joining the EFTA does nothing for immigration as free movement (just like in Switzerland, Norway and everywhere else) is part of the deal. Which makes the whole thing rather farcical. If you don't like immigration, why would you want to be a member of the EFTA?
Its not going to be acceptable to many Brexiters.
1. They want the £350m to be spent on the NHS. they will go ballistic of they find money is being sent to pay for the EU.
2. They will not wish to be bound by EU law, which is in effect what happens to Norway and Switzerland for dealinsg with the single market.
3. They will not wish to agree to the free movement of people as immigration was one of if not the biggest factor in deciding to leave.
It will look as though they have been misled if having believed they had gotten out of paying for the EU, away from EU laws and immigration we end up signing an agreement which includes all of those things. What would be the point of Brexit? We would be in the EU, but without influence.
You need to trust Boris, Farage, Hannan and Give that they cna get a much better deal; than the swiss managed because we are too important and the EU needs us more than we need them.
1. They want the £350m to be spent on the NHS. they will go ballistic of they find money is being sent to pay for the EU.
2. They will not wish to be bound by EU law, which is in effect what happens to Norway and Switzerland for dealinsg with the single market.
3. They will not wish to agree to the free movement of people as immigration was one of if not the biggest factor in deciding to leave.
It will look as though they have been misled if having believed they had gotten out of paying for the EU, away from EU laws and immigration we end up signing an agreement which includes all of those things. What would be the point of Brexit? We would be in the EU, but without influence.
You need to trust Boris, Farage, Hannan and Give that they cna get a much better deal; than the swiss managed because we are too important and the EU needs us more than we need them.
Original post by ByEeek
Your first point is spot on. And has nothing to do with the EU. Migrants are coming to the country and getting jobs. Employment is at very low levels compared with recent times, so you might say demand and supply are about right. But it is fair to say that the government should have invested more in areas of high immigration.
Well, and disperse the immigrants across the country appropriately to improve integration and combat homelessness in certain areas, for example, certain parts of London. They were all failings of government and that is a fact.
That said, joining the EFTA does nothing for immigration as free movement (just like in Switzerland, Norway and everywhere else) is part of the deal. Which makes the whole thing rather farcical. If you don't like immigration, why would you want to be a member of the EFTA?
I don't care what the idiots banging on about immigration think. A compromise will need to be reached or we risk alienating ourselves from the EU market completely which would be disastrous. If you wish to trade you need to make compromises and I'd rather those be on immigration than sovereignty, democracy or our ability to arrange our own FTA's with the wider world.
All of the idiots thinking they can have their cake and eat it need to wake up and realise that the real world doesn't work like that. I voted leave on the basis of us being able to engage with the wider world and the EU as well, not to spite ourselves and the EU in favour of the wider world like petulant children having a squabble.
Original post by 999tigger
We would be in the EU, but without influence.
Can you please stop spreading this complete lie. It is not like being in the EU without influence at all.
EU countries are bound to the same FTA's as those within the EU so we have to wait through an agonising process of roughly 10 years per trade deal to engage in the wider world.
With EFTA we will be able to arrange our own on our terms and any deals with the wider world will not be subject to EU law at all. Those FTA's will be subject to the terms agreed between both negotiating parties. Only our FTA with the European Common Market will be subject to EU law and regulations.
Original post by welshiee
Well, and disperse the immigrants across the country appropriately to improve integration and combat homelessness in certain areas, for example, certain parts of London. They were all failings of government and that is a fact.
I am not really sure how that would work. EU migrants move to areas that have jobs and latterly, where there are other migrant communities. The problem occurs where significant growth in a particular area puts strains on local infrastructure.
I'm with the OP as somebody that voted Leave and would be broadly happy with EFTA, infact i more or less voted for it and would have voted to Remain if i thought the Tories would actually leave the single market.
Regarding immigration i think we will end up compromising however free movement could be redressed to something like a quota system with an opt out for new member states. The quota would still be high enough that most current immigrants are not effected but it would place a CAP that may lower overtime as current EU states become more prosperous.
Regarding immigration i think we will end up compromising however free movement could be redressed to something like a quota system with an opt out for new member states. The quota would still be high enough that most current immigrants are not effected but it would place a CAP that may lower overtime as current EU states become more prosperous.
Original post by ByEeek
I am not really sure how that would work. EU migrants move to areas that have jobs and latterly, where there are other migrant communities. The problem occurs where significant growth in a particular area puts strains on local infrastructure.
It would start if the government decentralised power but of course that wont happen as they all only believe that London exists and are quite happy to stay in that bubble whilst the rest of the UK suffers.
Original post by Rakas21
I'm with the OP as somebody that voted Leave and would be broadly happy with EFTA, infact i more or less voted for it and would have voted to Remain if i thought the Tories would actually leave the single market.
Regarding immigration i think we will end up compromising however free movement could be redressed to something like a quota system with an opt out for new member states. The quota would still be high enough that most current immigrants are not effected but it would place a CAP that may lower overtime as current EU states become more prosperous.
Regarding immigration i think we will end up compromising however free movement could be redressed to something like a quota system with an opt out for new member states. The quota would still be high enough that most current immigrants are not effected but it would place a CAP that may lower overtime as current EU states become more prosperous.
I would give current EU migrants in the UK permanent residency to avoid any economic or social disruption. It would also be a nice middle finger to all of the racist idiots who have, since Thursday, thought it was a good idea to go around being xenophobic and racist to the hardworking migrants who come to this country. These idiots who are doing it need to realise the government is to blame, not these people.
Original post by welshiee
It would start if the government decentralised power but of course that wont happen as they all only believe that London exists and are quite happy to stay in that bubble whilst the rest of the UK suffers.
Um - decentralised? Do you mean like they have devolved power to Manchester and given Scotland more powers to raise their own taxes?
But it wouldn't work. If you decided to wanted to work in Frankfurt, but the German government dictated you should work in Stuttgart you wouldn't bother. So if anything, such a policy would stop immigration overnight.... and with it our economy.
Original post by ByEeek
Um - decentralised? Do you mean like they have devolved power to Manchester and given Scotland more powers to raise their own taxes?
Well, obviously not Manchester as it would be regional devolution like in Switzerland.
But it wouldn't work. If you decided to wanted to work in Frankfurt, but the German government dictated you should work in Stuttgart you wouldn't bother. So if anything, such a policy would stop immigration overnight.... and with it our economy.
No it wouldn't. There are plenty of immigrants who work hard and are happy to take opportunities up and down the UK.
Original post by welshiee
No it wouldn't. There are plenty of immigrants who work hard and are happy to take opportunities up and down the UK.
No it wouldn't. There are plenty of immigrants who work hard and are happy to take opportunities up and down the UK.
Which they do. And without the need of interference from government. Government should try not to regulate or control markets and especially the flow of people. They in theory, they are good at building infrastructure and providing services. I would surely be much easier to build more houses in Spalding than tell immigrants not to work there.
Never listen to naysayers. Switzerland is dong stunningly well. And Norway. the idea we have to do so much worse out is absurd and miserly. Keep calm and carry on, and forget all the hyperbole.
Quick Reply
Related discussions
- Who regrets the outcome of Brexit??
- Eurovision 2023 Discussion thread!
- February Book of the Month Suggestions - TSR Book Club
- Rethinking the nation state - what a Labour Government could do
- is it possible to pay ?
- Shouldn't Euthanasia be made freely available to all sick old people now? because
- Eligibility for student finance if I was in the EU for a period of the last 3 years
- British passport holder, British citizen, Live in EU. Need student loan for home fees
- What funding am I eligible for? Foundation course student
- Student Finance for non-UK/EEA spouse of UK National
- no holiday for 5yrs..
- Have you travelled to any different countries? Which ones?
- In a committee for a society and I am tired of dealing with this
- How many countries have you been to?
- The Open University Students Association
- Societies
- 2023–24 by-elections thread
- Locker rentals at Sir Tom Finney Sports Centre
- Kpop Dance Crew! (Brighton, Sussex Area)
- Finally, a study to show what we all knew anyway.
Latest
Last reply 2 minutes ago
Can someone please mark my AIC essay (my teacher is such an unreliable marker)Posted 4 minutes ago
Can someone please mark this out of 30(all my teachers refused)Last reply 21 minutes ago
Girl cries after first day of work "How do you have time for your life?"Chat
8
Last reply 21 minutes ago
My friend might be getting extra time and i hate it.Last reply 24 minutes ago
LSE anthropology and law 2024Last reply 29 minutes ago
Official University College London Applicant Thread for 2024Last reply 42 minutes ago
Is anyone going to graphic design in 2024 in university of Northampton?Posted 45 minutes ago
Online Delivery of Flowers to BangaloreTrending
Last reply 6 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 6 days ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
How did John Major become PM with barely any qualifications?Trending
Last reply 6 hours ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 6 days ago
Rayner denies wrongdoing over council house sale amid police reviewLast reply 1 week ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
2024 UK general election speculation and build-up threadLast reply 2 weeks ago
Trump needs a $464m bond in six days. What if he can't get it?Last reply 3 weeks ago
How did John Major become PM with barely any qualifications?
