Friday 7 December 2018

Putting The F Into EFTA

Proponents of any sort of "Norway Model" do not really want to leave the EU at all, and think that it only went bad at some point in the very late 1980s.

In any case, what on earth makes them think that EFTA would unbalance itself completely by letting us back in?

Another hung Parliament is coming, however, and we need our people to hold the balance of power in it.

I will stand for this parliamentary seat of North West Durham, if I can raise the £10,000 necessary to mount a serious campaign. Please email davidaslindsay@hotmail.com. Very many thanks.

5 comments:

  1. EFTA is not the EU. It has a treaty with the EU but is a quite separate thing and is not under the jurisdiction of the ECJ. It’s members are not governed by EU courts or justice and home affairs legislation and are not in the customs union or the Common Fisheries Policy or Common Agricultural Policy and have their own seat on the WTO. They also have a brake clause on free movement which Lichtenstein has activated. It’s infinitely preferable to EU membership.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's rule-taking without rule-making, paying while having no say, for countries whose politicians want to be in the EU but whose voters do not. But it would never let us back in, anyway. We are far too large, and we are demonstrably unreliable.

      Delete
  2. That’s completely untrue. Members can veto laws they don’t like and, with seats on the WTO and WCO (where most EU trade laws originate) and judges on the EFTA Court, they have more influence over EU laws than members.

    But the point is EFTA members are exempt from 75% of all EU laws and from the CFP and the CAP.

    That’s far better than being in the EU.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's taking the other 25 per cent while having no say over them, and paying for the privilege.

      Delete
  3. Stephen Kinnock wants this. Say no more.

    ReplyDelete