Immigration: the joy of independence
Thursday 25 April 2013
The decision, we are told, is in response to calls from the "far right" Swiss People's Party, and comes despite the opposition of the left and the country's powerful financial sector.
The sudden announcement may also have something to do with the fact that Switzerland is a democracy and that there are two referendums pending, aimed at limiting immigration. One is from the Swiss People's Party and other from the right-wing ecological group Ecopop. Predictably, the federal government is anxious to head them off at the pass.
The trigger for the new restrictions is a recent surge in the number of southern Europeans taking up residence, especially from Portugal and Spain, with up to 80,000 extra arrivals each year. These are settling in the country as the eurozone debt crisis bites in their home countries.
And what enables the Swiss government to put up the barriers is a clause in the bilateral agreement on migration with the European Union, of 21 June 1999. This permits temporary quotas on residency permits for EU residents wishing to work in Switzerland.
In its decision, Switzerland is applying to the EU as a whole limits already in effect to newer EU entrants Estonia, Hungary, Lithuania, Latvia, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia and the Czech Republic. Bulgaria and Romania are covered by a separate migration regime until 2016.
In a belated attempt at damage limitation, Social Democratic justice minister Simonetta Sommaruga tells a rather unhappy Brussels, "the EU is and will remain our most important partner". But, he says, "It's a fact that there is unease among the population, and it's necessary to take this unease seriously". Can one imagine a British minister using such words?
Catherine Ashton responds by saying she "regrets" the move and underlining the "great benefits" of EU-Swiss work mobility. She also notes that the split in permit quotas between the EU8 and EU17 groups is contrary to the 1999 agreement, which did not permit differentiation between EU member states.
With blissful insouciance, the Swiss government has limited to 2,180 the number of workers from the new entrant EU nations that could work in the country, at the same time holding the 17 older EU states to 53,700 for 12 months.
However, all good things come to an end, and the limiting clause is set to expire in 2014. Between then and now, though, there are those pesky referendums which could force new negotiations.
Then, perhaps we will see a clash of wills, as the people assert their rights to control their own borders – in a way that only independent status will allow.
COMMENT THREAD
CRISIS FOR "EUROPE"
Thursday 25 April 2013
With a degree of profound weariness, one also observes this newspaper telling us that the survey result raises "fundamental questions about its (the EU's) democratic legitimacy", as if it had any democratic legitimacy to start with – which it doesn't.
Strangely, though, we also have a situation where this Eurobarometer survey does not seem to have been published, with theGuardian, in collaboration with other leading newspapers in the other five countries, claiming exclusive rights – even though none of the others give the story the same prominence as the British counterpart.
Thus we have to trust the europhile Guardian accurately to inform us of a survey which is about – oddly – trust of the European Union, with the further handicap of the data having been analysed by the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), which also has not published any details.
With that, we are led to believe that, "Euroscepticism is soaring to a degree that is likely to feed populist anti-EU politics and frustrate European leaders' efforts to arrest the collapse in support for their project".
As to the detail (above), in Spain, trust in the EU – however measured and analysed - fell from 65 to 20 percent over the five-year period while mistrust soared to 72 from 23 percent. In five of the six countries, including Britain, mistrust prevailed over trust by sizeable margins, whereas in 2007 – with the exception of the UK – the opposite was the case.
Five years ago, 56 percent of Germans "tended to trust" the EU, whereas 59 percent now "tend to mistrust". In France, mistrust has risen from 41 to 56 percent. In Italy, where public confidence in Europe has traditionally been higher than in the national political class, mistrust of the EU has almost doubled from 28 to 53 percent.
Even in Poland, which enthusiastically joined the EU less than a decade ago and is the single biggest beneficiary from the transfers of tens of billions of euros from Brussels, support has plummeted from 68 to 48 percent, although it remains the sole country surveyed where more people trust than mistrust the union.
In Britain, the mistrust grew from 49 to 69 percent, the highest level with the exception of the extraordinary turnaround in Spain.
Citing José Ignacio Torreblanca, head of the ECFR's Madrid office, the Guardian goes on to tell us that, "The damage is so deep that it does not matter whether you come from a creditor, debtor country, euro would-be member or the UK: everybody is worse off". And thus we learn that: "Citizens now think that their national democracy is being subverted by the way the euro crisis is conducted".
And now we get input from José Manuel Barroso, who said on Tuesday that the European "dream" was under threat from a "resurgence of populism and nationalism" across the EU. "At a time when so many Europeans are faced with unemployment, uncertainty and growing inequality, a sort of 'European fatigue' has set in", he complains, "coupled with a lack of understanding".
What is then rather worrying is that Mr Barroso then asks, "Who does what, who decides what, who controls whom and what? And where are we heading to?" Frankly, if he doesn't know, who on earth does?
All of this, though, is enough to get Raedwald's juices flowing, as he notes – from the tenor of the Guardian's comments - a more serious malaise, in that the Left seems to have fallen out of love with the EU.
The problem, however, is even greater than it at first seems, judging from the ideas offered by the writers from the six leading newspapers to help redefine the union.
What strikes one from these is the poverty of ambition, as the ideas range from stopping the Strasbourg shuttle, to providing a Eur-app to having a Europe FC United. Then we have a suggestion that the launch of a European Army is a good idea (a plan dating from the 1950s), and the invention of "a new division of power", to deal with the "democratic deficit".
Startlingly, from Adam Leszczyński, of Gazeta Wyborcza, in Warsaw, all we get is that, "Europe needs a leading idea that could provide Europeans with symbols and aims evoking emotions, attachment and solidarity". But, adly for the poor dear, he does not know what such an idea could be. But "if we do not find it, every crisis will threaten this impressive building with destruction", he says.
It's time to move in the demolition contractors, methinks.
COMMENT THREAD
Richard North 25/04/2013
Posts
