From 2014 to 2021, Switzerland was in negotiations with the EU on a framework agreement,
also known as an institutional agreement (InstA).
The aim is to consolidate the bilateral approach.
After negotiations were broken off in May 2021, negotiations with the EU were resumed in March 2024.
Thomas Kaiser from "Zeitgeschehen im Fokus" writes that the current constitutional basis - the so-called Common
Understanding - can no longer be called a framework agreement, as otherwise it would immediately fall through.
So it was quickly renamed the "Bilateral Agreements III".
As the bilateral approach is supported by the majority of the population according to a recent survey,
it looks as if the Federal Council's plan is working.
But this is throwing sand in the eyes of the population.
According to Kaiser, the fact is that the EU has the same demands in the Common Understanding as in the framework agreement.
She demanded that in the event of disagreements regarding the interpretation of the bilateral agreements, the
European Court of Justice would decide as the final instance.
Kaiser says: "In plain language, this means that EU law applies.
Switzerland must therefore automatically accept EU law, which is euphemistically referred to as the dynamic adoption of law.
But there is nothing dynamic about it, Switzerland has no room for maneuver."
Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis spoke to the media in Bern on November 27, 2024.
A meeting was scheduled with the Vice President of the European Commission, Maros Sefcovic.
According to Cassis, the aim remains to reach a substantive conclusion to the negotiations before the end of the year.
The amount of the cohesion contribution that Switzerland pays the EU for its partial access to the European
single market will only be discussed at the very end.
"In the end, we can discuss money," says Cassis.
According to research by Swiss Radio and Television "SRF", Switzerland is likely to pay a good CHF 350
million per year in cohesion funds to the EU in future.
This is significantly higher than the approximately 130 million per year that Switzerland has been
paying for poorer countries in the east of the EU.
In an article in the Swiss tabloid newspaper "BLICK" from December 1, 2024, an insider is quoted as follows
"Even if not every point of the negotiating mandate is fulfilled, it is possible to say: we have a deal."
For both Bern and Brussels, it is clear: "We have negotiated enough, the rest must be clarified domestically."
According to "BLICK", the following timetable was planned:
"On December 13, the Federal Council will once again discuss the EU dossier.
If he then gives the green light, there will be a flurry of flashbulbs on the Saturday before Christmas, December 21:
Then the head of the EU Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, will come to Bern in person to
seal the symbolic end of the negotiations."
According to an article from "SRF" on December 11, this can be heard both in Brussels and in Bern.
According to "BLICK", nothing is "in the bag" yet, but there are many indications that the deal with
the EU is to be concluded over the Christmas period.
Over the Christmas period?! - When the public is busy elsewhere?! Could this be so that the deal
with the EU can go through without a big outcry?
So far, there has always been a huge outcry against a framework agreement with the EU. The last negotiations
had to be broken off because the resistance was too great.
It would not be the first time in history that important decisions have been pushed through
at times when the public is otherwise occupied.
On December 23, 1913, one day before Christmas Eve, the amendment to the law establishing the
FED was waved through by the decimated Congress.
During the "summer fairy tale" of the 2006 World Cup, Germany decided to increase VAT from
16 to 19 percent - effective January 1, 2007.
Further examples can be found in the program "Are major events being used as a deliberate distraction?"
Finally, see what Swiss National Councillor Franz Grüter says in an interview with the independent Swiss
internet television channel "HOCH2" about why the new framework agreement is highly dangerous.
You have now briefly mentioned the framework agreement that the Federal Council wants to conclude with the EU.
So it's a kind of super-treaty, "Bilaterals III", as they say, but it's not individual agreements, it's an
overall package, a so-called institutional solution.
They actually wanted to be ready to negotiate the treaty by the end of the year. You are close to this policy, both as a
foreign policy expert and as a member of the National Council.
What are you hearing? What is the status of these negotiations?
[So I can say that the Federal Council would like to conclude these negotiations by the end of the year.
It is important to note that the EU attaches great importance to the fact that these are no longer
bilateral agreements, because they no longer are.
Bilateral would mean that we have treaties at eye level, but here European law would be
imposed on us and so it is no longer bilateral.
On the contrary, it would be a treaty of subjugation. Well, the Federal Council would like to conclude it.
At the same time, around 100 people are working in various departments in Bern to make all the
necessary changes to domestic policy legislation.
There is talk of at least 30 laws that still need to be adapted.
And then - if this timetable works out - the Federal Council will issue a consultation dispatch next year, i.e. in 2025.
According to the Federal Council, the dispatch comprises over 1,000 pages, just so you can see how huge it is.
And then it would go to parliament next year, probably in the second half of the year, and I expect
that there will be a referendum sometime in 2026.
This will be the most important referendum of the last 30 years.
I have said that this is the mother of all battles.
So that's where the stakes really are for Switzerland - whether we can continue to be free, independent and directly democratic
- and from that point of view, the big vote will probably take place in 2026.
Let's go through these points a little more.
You briefly mentioned what would be affected by this. Keyword "direct democracy".
Why do you think this would be jeopardized by such a framework agreement?
So you also have to say in advance, here again, the mainstream media report every day about some kind of
safeguard clauses and some kind of student fees, some kind of points from these negotiations.
But actually, the really big issue, namely Switzerland's institutional ties to the
EU, is no longer being discussed at all.
What is still being discussed in Brussels is actually a side issue.
And the most important issue in this treaty is, firstly, that we would automatically - it's called
dynamic - we would automatically have to adopt EU law.
If the Swiss people hold a referendum or a plebiscite and do not comply, they will be punished.
This is then called compensatory measures.
If we do not reach an agreement, the European Court of Justice will have the final say on what applies here in Switzerland.
We would be a Brussels colony. And last but not least, we would have to pay money to the EU on a recurring basis.
These are the four most important points that are actually the biggest problem for Switzerland.
And all the other points that are still being negotiated may also be important, but they are not the main problem.
When I listen to you, I can see that direct democracy is being weakened, is at risk,
sovereignty, we are no longer really independent.
You mentioned this fee at the end. I would like to expand on that a little more.
This is a so-called market access fee, an entry ticket actually for this market.
Why is this so one-sided? The EU also has access to the Swiss market.
So why doesn't Switzerland charge such a fee?
How does this one-sidedness come about? And why is it so high?
We have now heard again from various sources that the EU apparently wants several hundred million every year.
You can quickly reach several billion in a short space of time. How does that happen?
From the EU's perspective - I was in Brussels with a delegation shortly after the first
negotiations were broken off in 2021, in November
- In Brussels, Switzerland has always been portrayed as if we were the big "cherry pickers" and that we were
benefiting from the European Union and therefore had to pay.
Now imagine if the USA traded with the EU, or China traded with the EU, it would never occur to anyone to demand money for it.
And in the relationship between Switzerland and the EU, we buy around 20 billion more per year than the other way round.
So we are a super good customer of the European Union and the EU should actually be paying us money and not the other way round.
So the world is crazy and the expectation of the EU is that it will follow this Norway model.
And you can roughly extrapolate that, it would probably be up to a billion a year that we would have to pay the EU.
So it's completely incomprehensible and I also don't understand why the Federal Council didn't
include this in the negotiations from the outset.
So these points are no longer being discussed in Brussels.
How come? Has the state government somehow lost its compass? Is this not important to them?
Does it value other things so highly that you say, "That's not a problem, we'd rather
pay a billion because we'll get so much else?"
What would this other be? What is the rationality, the logic of the Federal Council?
You have to turn back the clock for a moment. On May 26, 2021, the Federal Council broke off negotiations in Brussels.
At the time, President Parmelin was in front of the media with Ms. von der Leyen - Ms. von der Leyen was there with a petrified
expression - and he told her: "We cannot sign this treaty."
And then the following happened in Bern: The other parties intervened - massively - with the Federal Council:
"That's not possible, he would have to start new negotiations again."
Ignazio Cassis, the Foreign Minister, said at the time: "We will never conclude a Framework Agreement 2.0."
But what he has now done is worse than a framework agreement 2.0.
Because at that time, these funds to the EU were not included.
And Switzerland then unconditionally paid CHF 1 billion to the EU in September 2021.
It was like feeling guilty in Bern.
I also remember when there were politicians who went to Brussels and apologized for Switzerland. You have to imagine that.
And that was the mood that led to the Federal Council re-entering into negotiations with the EU.
This time, unfortunately, I don't think the Federal Council will stop this exercise itself.
He will probably - with a high degree of certainty - take this to parliament and ultimately to the electorate.
Here, too, the big question is: "Should this be done with a majority of the cantons or only with a majority of the people?
The fact that this is not a matter of course, that it requires a majority of the cantons, simply shows that people
know that the population is very critical - and would even like to override the majority of the cantons.
There is now the Compass Initiative, which actually wants to achieve this, so that the whole democracy -
including the cantons - can have a say. That is what is meant by a majority of the cantons.
You are also an entrepreneur - as we said at the beginning - not just a politician.
In business terms, what does it take to make progress in Europe, to do business?
Do we need any special agreements at all or what kind of political framework - not exactly framework
agreements - but what kind of framework is needed?
Is free trade enough? Or what concept do you actually have in mind as an alternative to this strong
institutional integration that the EU, Brussels and Bern want?
Well, I would like to start by saying that I too am concerned: We do not want war with the EU.
Incidentally, I am also not happy when the EU is not doing well.
It is not doing well. The EU is not doing well economically.
So I'm really not gloating, but ultimately we are interested in a good relationship with the European Union.
We can also conclude as many treaties with the EU as we want.
But what is not possible is that we - and this was the most important message that President Parmelin was
not allowed to say on behalf of the Federal Council: We must finally speak plainly to the EU:
"We cannot and will not conclude contracts where we have to assume your rights."
And these are the economic advantages and differences where we can continue to stand out in the future - even though we are a
high-wage country - if we have more attractive framework conditions, if we have lower taxes, if we have
labor laws that are more liberal than those in the EU.
And all these advantages will also help Switzerland to be successful in the long term.
And if we have to change all that, then we will fall into the average middle class in Europe.
There are then no longer any legal differences.
This is what is known as a "level playing field".
So everything is aligned with the iron. Everyone has the same laws. And we don't want that.
We don't want skewers of the same length, we want longer skewers.
Then we will continue to be economically successful.