"Dear Britain, there is life outside the EU" - Switzerland and Iceland

[Blackleaf]

Two politicians from two European countries which are not members of the EU - Switzerland and Iceland - tell the The Telegraph that Britain (a much larger country) would be much be better off out of the EU.

The British people are to decide in a referendum whether or not Britain should remain in the EU.

Dear Britain, there is life outside the EU

Iceland, Switzerland and Norway all enjoy the perks of the European market without the burden of the EU. So come on out - the water's lovely

Europe’s political elites want more Europe not less Europe Photo: ALAMY


By Thomas Aeschi and Guthlaugur Thor Thordarson
10 Jul 2015
The Telegraph

9 Comments

Thomas Aeschi (left) is a Swiss MP; Guthlaugur Thor Thordarson (right) is an Icelandic MP

Is it possible to be part of a European market but not of a political union in Europe? Absolutely. Our countries are doing precisely that now. And you know something? It’s working pretty well.

We are Government MPs from the European countries who didn’t join the EU – those in the European Free Trade Area (EFTA). It’s been many years since any opinion poll showed a pro-EU majority in an EFTA nation. Iceland has formally withdrawn its application, and the Swiss pro-EU campaign has admitted defeat and closed down. As for Norway, the latest survey there showed 17.8 per cent in favour of joining, 70.5 per cent against.

Why do people prefer our deal to yours? Not because it’s perfect – nothing is perfect – but because it allows us to participate in the European market while retaining our self-government.

Of course, each of our states have struck slightly different deals with Brussels. Iceland is part of the European Economic Area, which brings it within some elements of EU jurisdiction, albeit almost entirely in economic fields; Switzerland relies instead on a series of bilateral treaties.

Still, the broad picture is similar enough. We buy and sell freely within the European market. But we are outside the Common Agricultural Policy, the Common Fisheries Policy, the Common Foreign and Security Policy, the rules on common EU citizenship, the harmonisation of criminal justice and other non-economic matters. We pay a contribution to the EU budget – but less than a third, in per capita terms, of what Britain does.

Critically, we are also outside the Common External Tariff. In other words, as well as trading freely with the EU, we can also sign bilateral treaties with non-EU states – something that Britain, as an EU member, can’t do. This is a real advantage in a world where Europe is the only continent that isn’t growing. For example, both our countries signed free trade agreements with China last year. Britain isn’t allowed to do so.

It’s true that our exporters must meet EU standard when they sell into the EU, just as they must meet Japanese standards when they sell to Japan. But, in most cases, we don’t have to apply those standards to non-EU exports. This becomes a greater advantage with every passing month, as the EU’s share of world GDP shrinks.

The clue is in the name: European Free Trade Association. Free trade and national sovereignty turn out to make a pretty good combination. Income per head in EFTA countries is, on average, 56 per cent higher than in the EU. And both our countries export more to the EU, in proportionate terms, than Britain does.

Britain was once the leading EFTA state. It could be again. Come on in: the water’s lovely.


Dear Britain, there is life outside the EU - Telegraph

 

[EagleSmack]

Stick a fork in it... there's no England anymore.

 

[Blackleaf]

You want EU facts? We Eurosceptics have got 1,000 pages of them

EU enthusiasts want a fact-based debate. They should practise what they preach

Isolated in Europe? David Cameron could call a referendum on EU membership as early as 2016

By Matthew Elliott
24 Jul 2015

492 Comments

As Parliament winds down for the summer and MPs head back to their constituencies, debates around Britain’s future in or outside the European Union only show signs of heating up. A new group seeking the mantle of the "In campaign" launched on Monday and marked its arrival on the scene by calling for a “fact-based” discussion around what Britain’s future relationship with the European Union should look like.

At Business for Britain, we welcome any calls for a fact-based debate in this often highly-charged issue (in fact, we set out over 1,000 pages of them here). However, it seems that, even though they’ve only been established a few days, the "In campaign" seem to be breaking their own golden rule already. By pledging to give a voice to those who want to keep “Britain in Europe”, they seem to be asserting that leaving an unreformed EU (a set of institutions) is equivalent to divorce from Europe (a geographical land mass).

Given the presence of such an elementary error so early on in the campaign’s existence, it is probably worth undertaking a brief overview of some other prominent myths peddled by the "in at all costs" crowd which may rear their heads in the run up to the referendum.

First, there are the numerous warnings around the alleged economic calamity which would befall the UK if we were to be outside the EU. These include the claims that 3 million jobs would be lost if Britain left the EU (a favourite of Nick Clegg); an assertion that has been repeatedly rebutted by independent fact-checkers, and that households would be worse off if Britain were outside a political union with its near neighbours.

In fact, it is now clear that business is split over whether the UK should remain in an unreformed EU. Senior figures from leading businesses such as JCB and Ineos, as well as entrepreneur James Dyson, have said that the UK would have nothing to fear from being outside, and could continue to trade freely whilst acting to reduce the high regulatory cost of EU membership (by amending burdensome energy rules, for example). What is more, a new analysis compiled for our major "Change, or go" publication showed that Britain’s budget contributions to the EU now far outweigh the trade benefits we accrue from EU membership; a raw deal by anyone’s standards.

Another favourite of EU enthusiasts is the claim that Britain would have to comply with all EU rules if it left the bloc, but would lose any influence at the stage where these rules are formed. This often derided ‘Norwegian Option’ in fact ignores the twin realities of both our declining influence in EU institutions and how global trade rules are now made. The process of globalisation has centred the formation of global trade standards on bodies which operate above the EU, and where Britain’s voice silenced as it must toe the EU enforced line.

Increasing Britain’s influence in the World Trade Organisation, for example, as well as the ability to make our own free trade deals, would be two significant benefits of leaving an unreformed EU. Far from losing our voice, we would be better able to punch above our weight where it matters.

The third misnomer which has been advanced repeatedly by EU backers is that political union among European countries has been responsible for peace on the continent since World War Two. This claim ignores the pivotal role of Nato, and particularly the Anglo-American alliance, in keeping the peace after 1945 and winning the Cold War.

Meanwhile the EU has failed to act in Balkans conflicts and is currently reaping the results of policy failure in Libya. Moving forward, forging strong alliances with like-minded states, rather than backing the arch-federalist and operationally ineffective proposal for a European Army, offer the best means through which to keep the peace in the years ahead.

In the run up to the EU referendum, voters will increasingly be looking for authoritative sources of information from which they can make up their minds on "In" or "Out". The In campaign’s pledge to pursue a “fact-based” effort is welcome but, by conflating the terms "EU" and "Europe", they risk diminishing rather than enhancing public understanding on this vital issue. That said, I wish Will Straw, Ryan Coetzee, Lucy Thomas and Andrew Cooper all the best as they set up the "In" campaign. Having run the NOtoAV referendum campaign, I know what they have let themselves in for. I’m sure we’ll be seeing a lot of each other.

Matthew Elliott is Chief Executive of Business for Britain


You want EU facts? We Eurosceptics have got 1,000 pages of them - Telegraph