The key point: should the EU determine what applies in our country?

Current Concerns: Following the visit of EU Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič to Bern, the Federal Council once again announced  - without having to date informed the public of any of the results - that the negotiations on the Switzerland-EU agreement should be concluded by the end of the year. Is the Federal Council being so secretive because it has presumably been able to obtain very few positive results from these negotiations?
Franz Grüter: Yes, the points that the Federal Council is negotiating are actually nothing more than side issues. There are daily reports in the media about all sorts of demands and concessions, about the safeguard clause, about the expenses regulation, about hundreds of small points. But what is no longer being negotiated at all is the key point of this submission agreement: that we would automatically have to adopt EU law in future, that the European Union would tell us what is to apply in Switzerland. If we, the voters, decided differently in a vote on an initiative or a referendum, then there would be “compensatory measures”.

What is meant by “compensatory measures”?
It is a mealy-mouthed euphemism for penalties. We would effectively have a gun to our heads with every vote: If we do not vote the way the EU wants, we will be punished. If there is a dispute, the European Court of Justice will decide conclusively and bindingly what applies here in this country. That is what it says in the Common Understanding between the Federal Council and the EU. And on top, there will be constantly recurring payments of billions to the EU. These four points are no longer part of the negotiations, which is why it is already clear today that no matter what else is in this paper, it is essentially a colonial treaty. We will have to fight against it on a massive scale.

The supporters say, of course, that there will be an arbitration tribunal that could decide on the EU’s compensatory measures.
Yes, of course there is a court of arbitration, so much is true. But when it comes to interpreting the law, when it comes to disputes, when it comes to what exactly will apply in future, the decision of the European Court of Justice is binding on the arbitration tribunal. This means that the European Court of Justice has the last, final word. And yet this is completely unacceptable for any independent state, to allow a foreign court to determine what will and will not apply in that country. This would be the end of direct democracy and also the end of the Swiss model of success. Ultimately, this is about the question of whether Switzerland wants to submit itself to the European Union.

The proponents claim that without a framework agreement we would face economic problems.
The EU is the opposite of a model of success. Take a look at the European Union, it has hit rock bottom, it is financially ruined. The EU states are completely over-indebted. The EU is faltering and has become a huge bureaucratic juggernaut. The only thing that works properly in Europe is regulation. There are more and more new laws and regulations. The Green Deal comprises 14,000 pages of regulations! The EU law on artificial intelligence contains almost 500 pages. This regulatory frenzy means that companies are also increasingly suffering under this gigantic bureaucratic apparatus and ultimately losing their innovative strength and economic performance.
  This is why, as contrasted with the USA and China, the EU has fallen completely behind when it comes to innovation. Brussels is instead concerned with pet bottle tops that are no longer allowed to fall off – in other words, complete insanity, unbelievably bureaucratic regulations that achieve nothing. I believe being able to remain economically independent is extremely important for Switzerland as an export nation.

The group of entrepreneurs Kompass Europa has launched an initiative against this EU treaty, and more than 2,000 entrepreneurs share your opinion that Switzerland would be better off continuing to pursue an independent and democratically controlled economic policy in the future.
Yes, I am very pleased that organisations like Kompass Europa exist. They are not the only ones. There are also others, for example the organisation autonomiesuisse, also with successful entrepreneurs like Hans-Jörg Bertschi and Hans Peter Zehnder, who are leading forces there. And it is interesting that suddenly people, personalities, entrepreneurs, who normally have nothing to do with politics, have the courage to stand up and say: we must not sign this. I have to say, I greatly respect these people. This also includes personalities such as Bernhard Russi or Kurt Aeschbacher, who are not politicians. But they feel that we are going in the wrong direction if we submit to the EU. They are fighting for a cause that is extremely important, and they are having an impact.

And to boot, the Kompass Europa initiators want important international treaties to be subjected to a mandatory referendum including the cantonal majority rule.
That is the case. A mandatory referendum would not only require a popular but also a cantonal majority. And then a National Councillor Simon Michel [Free Democrats, pharmaceutical entrepreneur] comes along and says that small cantons like the two Appenzell cannot be allowed to tip the scales when it comes to a decision of this sort and magnitude. What arrogance! It is actually one of the characteristics of our state model that precisely not only the large cantons can decide. It is reprehensible that people want to undermine this model especially on this important issue.

Listening to you, I find it even harder to believe that the business association economiesuisse continues to insist on concluding this agreement.
With economiesuisse, large corporations are in control, and these are almost exclusively run by foreigners. They have little personal connection to Switzerland and are not necessarily interested in our direct democracy and other special features of our country. But I have noticed that enthusiasm for the EU has clearly waned among large companies. They can clearly see how the EU’s regulatory frenzy is harming the economic nations of Germany and France, especially in global competition.

The Council of States has approved a gas agreement with Germany and Italy, under which the three countries intend to support each other in the event of gas shortages. Should not Switzerland conclude more such agreements with individual countries, especially neighbouring ones?
Yes, that is a good example of how important issues for our country can also be resolved directly with other countries. I advocate good relations with the whole of Europe. Europe is not just the EU. We should maintain good relations; we want to trade in our mutual interest. We can also conclude individual agreements. But these agreements should be on an equal footing, they must be terminable and we will not allow anything to be imposed on us, especially not the automatic adoption of EU law. This gas agreement is a great example of a genuine bilateral agreement where both sides benefit. This is how I essentially see the future.

Thank you very much for this interesting interview, Mr Grüter.  •