[ad_1]
Politically, the Corona crisis has left a lot on hold. But no one wanted to talk about the situation regarding the framework agreement with the EU. Too great is the risk that if you vote in favor of the SVP limitation initiative, everything will have to go back to square one. After today’s vote on Sunday, the debate should resume. BLICK answers the most pressing questions.
What is the state of affairs?
The Federal Council wants to follow the bilateral route, update the old treaties and conclude new ones that facilitate our economy’s access to the EU market. On the part of the European Union, however, the condition for this is a framework agreement. This is to ensure that changes to EU law are automatically adopted in the 120 contracts to date without having to renegotiate each time. This also includes a mechanism for the dispute between Berne and Brussels.
The negotiations took years, the stacks of paper weigh tons. The negotiations officially ended at the end of 2018 and there is an EU proposal on the table. It will apply to five existing agreements and all future agreements that give Switzerland access to the European market.
The project is very controversial in Switzerland and has no real majorities either in parliament or in the population. The EU doesn’t really want to renegotiate, so the Federal Council avoids the V word and prefers to talk about more precise clarifications.
What are the big fissures?
There are three areas that still need to be clarified: wage protection, the Union Citizens Directive and state aid. “If a solution is found in these areas, the Federal Council will sign the agreement,” Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis (59) said last year.
- Salary protection:
The EU wants Switzerland to adopt its guidelines on protection against wage dumping. But these do not go as far as the standards currently in force in Switzerland. For example, the registration period for foreign companies would be shortened and there would be fewer controls. For unions, compromising wage protection is out of the question. They want the issue to be completely excluded from the deal. - Unionsbürgerrichtlinie:
In the Union Citizens Directive, the EU defines what rights EU citizens have in other countries. If Switzerland took over, EU citizens in this country could, for example, receive social assistance more quickly and residence permits would be more difficult to withdraw. The EU wanted to indicate in the text of the contract that Switzerland would adopt the directive within a certain period of time. The Federal Council, however, wanted to explicitly exclude them from the agreement. As a compromise, the EU Citizens Directive is simply not mentioned at all now. It is feared that sooner or later this will become a problem for Switzerland. - State aid
The EU defines state aid as tax exemptions and other advantages that the state grants to certain companies. In principle, they are prohibited in the EU if they distort competition. In Switzerland, on the other hand, they are very widespread; for example, they include contributions to promote tourism, state guarantees for cantonal banks, or subsidies for hydroelectric plants. Switzerland wants to specify the framework agreement in this area so that such subsidies are not prohibited in the future.
And the “foreign judges”?
But a fourth issue is also controversial. What if Switzerland and the EU get into their hair? The answer to this question is fundamental to the framework agreement. A few years ago it was the biggest bone of contention in discussions in this country – the keyword “foreign judges.” The framework agreement establishes that an arbitration court would come into play in the event of a dispute. However, when it comes to EU law, the Court of Justice of the European Communities would have the last word. Meanwhile, the dispute over dispute settlement had somewhat taken a back seat in view of the three above-mentioned problem areas. But now it is completely back.
What’s next now?
If the limitation initiative is rejected as expected, the ball is in the hands of Switzerland; then they should make suggestions on how to proceed. Chancellor Cassis has announced that he will resume discussions after saying no to the SVP initiative. A Swiss delegation from Parliament is also scheduled to travel to Brussels in early October. But while the SVP warns that the Federal Council now wants to finalize it, now it seems that the framework agreement has no chance. A solution is only likely with state aid, but a wage protection commitment is an illusion, as VIEW’s research shows.
Ultimately, the Federal Council has to decide whether to sign the current, unsatisfactory agreement and present it to parliament, or whether to declare it dead itself.
