The will of the people for Swiss independence will break ground!

“Switzerland must finally be honest with itself and admit that our political system of direct democracy is simply not compatible with that of the EU, full stop.” Read in a recently printed letter to the editor. It’s that easy to put the Swiss point of view into words. In view of the sometimes-massive contortions of the facts by the Federal Council and in the consultation responses, the steadfastness of an “ordinary citizen” does good. Many, very many fellow citizens carry this will to preserve the unique Swiss state model.

Legal certainty is
only possible on an equal footing,
 based on good faith and trust

The Federal Council has completed the consultation of the parliamentary commissions and economic organisations as well as the conference of cantonal governments on its “negotiation mandate” with Brussels. Practically all respondents support the start of negotiations in principle, but with more or less important exceptional demands and clarifications about which the Federal Council should “negotiate hard”. This also applies to the Conference of the Cantons (KdK), which is the focus this time.
  Because even the most emulative EU turbos in Switzerland are aware that its freedom-loving population – used to democracy – will ultimately put a spoke in their own politicians and EU bureaucrats’ wheels at the ballot box as soon as they move away from the theoretical phrases towards the concrete content, so to speak “get down to the nitty-gritty”. For example, there would be an even greater increase in immigration if the EU Citizens’ Directive were imposed on Switzerland, or on the sale of our hydropower from the cantons and municipalities onto the EU market if large corporations and liberalisation advocates were to push through an electricity agreement.
  Even a new edition of the agreement with Brussels cannot bring us more legal certainty – and more security of electricity supply: legal certainty is only possible on an equal footing, on the basis of good faith and trust.

Negotiation mandate
or a quasi-completed result?

Now the Federal Council wants to tie up the negotiations by the end of 2024, while the EU Commission would rather bring the negotiations to a close before the EU elections in summer. Then renewed consultations on the outcome of the negotiations would follow, ensued by the message from the Federal Council to the National Council and the Council of States, followed by the parliamentary debates. In the end, the sovereign decides in Switzerland.
  It remains to be seen how much space the committees in Brussels, which are not very used to democracy, will give our negotiating team. Against its better judgment, the Federal Council maintains that the present “package” of contracts and programs (cf. Current Concerns of 16 January and 27 February 2024) was something completely different than the framework agreement that failed in June 2021, because the individual parts could be designed more freely.
  The Kompass/Europe business association, for example, contradicts this: “As you can easily see, the Federal Council wants a framework agreement 2.0. This is not progress, but rather a step backwards, because the fundamental construct with dynamic legal adoption and the jurisdiction of the ECJ remains the same.”¹ Or the long-time NZZ business editor and President of the Progress Foundation, Gerhard Schwarz. He criticises “the fact that the efforts of the last two years in Bern are described as exploratory talks. In fact, the conversations were more than that. The Common Understanding, which was drawn up – without a parliamentary mandate – looks like a result of negotiations that little can be changed.”² (emphasis mw)  •

¹ https://kompasseuropa.ch/der-bundesrat-will-einen-rahmenvertrag-2/
² Schwarz, Gerhard. «Kolumne. Wie die ‹Bilateralen III› schöngeredet werden.» (Column. How the “Bilateral III” is glossed over) In: Neue Zürcher Zeitungof 9 January 2024