Norman Smith Negotiating Brexit cd take longer than the second world war says the Foreign Secretary
Sounds very likely. The Lisbon Treaty took 8 years.
Remind me, Richard, were BMW's and Mercs and Audis and Porsches piled up on the dockside waiting for buyers whilst the Lisbon Treaty was negotiated for 8 years?
We were all part of the single market, so it did not matter. Two years after Article 50 is invoked the UK won' be, unless all sides agree an extension. In which case we will still be an EU member state.
The Germans have a problem then. Two years to get their rear bumpers into gear.
Norman Lamont making the very same point on the DP right now.
Mr. Nabavi, the point is that some in the Remain campaign, such as the PM, are stating the Leave option is tantamount to economic suicide and would leave us dangerously exposed to terrorism and the Black Death. If it's that bad, why's he even giving us the option? Parents don't ask their children if they'd like cheese, ham, or razorblades in their sandwiches.
You are the one sounding rattled today - can you provide the link to Cameron - or anyone -saying Brexit would expose us to the Black Death?
Frankly it's a mess for the GOP. Whether it's the post general election Trump GOP or the non Trump GOP the question remains - How do the GOP cope with an ever changing demographic working against them, especially in swing states and their continuing inability to provide a viable alternative to Democrat contenders, who for all their faults are able to bring a coalition together and appear like a member of the human race to swing voters, independents and moderate voters?
And yet the GOP manages very well in congressional and gubernatorial elections. It's not the case that they don't have plenty of support to tap into.
Indeed but look at the type of winning GOP candidates that are elected in swing states.
If the Republican establishment are correct then all they have to do is wait until Trump gets stuffed in November and then tell the party 'we told you so'
They are against Trump because he might win, which mightily threatens their cosy positions.
Have you seen the republican voter numbers from Super Tuesday?? Record turnouts almost everywhere. Trump has electrified the Republican party.
Indeed and with Cruz now his main rival if Trump loses in November it looks like Cruz will be nominee in 2020 a GOP establishment nightmare for two election cycles
I am in the strange yet unexciting position of edging nearer to REMAIN, while being slightly more convinced of a LEAVE victory.
My reasoning, such as it is: it looks more and more likely, to me, that the EU will collapse or radically change, anyway, in the next 5-10 years, given ongoing eurogeddon, migration crises. etc. This will perforce mean chaos, and then some form of Brexit: an associate membership.
Why add to the chaos, and why risk even more chaos, right now? There will be a more sensible and propitious time to tiptoe away from Brussels, and it will probably come very soon. And we will get a better deal, as there will be all to play for.
I'm not convinced of this argument, but it is swaying me. I am about 55% STAY at the moment (this could change after lunch, or after some particularly pompous, nauseating, sanctimonious post from Richard Nabavi, who is doing a good one man campaign for LEAVE)
Against that, the more I look at the turnout question, the more it seems to favour LEAVE. Oldies are very much LEAVE. LEAVERS are way more motivated. Turnout will be crucial, and when you look at those certain to vote, LEAVE is significantly ahead.
That's my one pence worth, pre lunch.
The other big turnout group are the middle classes, who tend to be more Remain. But I agree with you, if turnout is below GE levels it will massively favour Leave.
I would be shocked if turnout is below GE levels.
I would be equally shocked if it reached GE levels. I think turnout will be respectable, say 55-60%, but no higher than that.
Mr. Nabavi, the point is that some in the Remain campaign, such as the PM, are stating the Leave option is tantamount to economic suicide and would leave us dangerously exposed to terrorism and the Black Death. If it's that bad, why's he even giving us the option? Parents don't ask their children if they'd like cheese, ham, or razorblades in their sandwiches.
You are the one sounding rattled today - can you provide the link to Cameron - or anyone -saying Brexit would expose us to the Black Death?
Oh purleeez talking of rattled, why are you taking a figure of speech said in jest to illustrate a general point as gospel.
"Brussels tax hike to send e-cigarette price soaring"
I foresee a lot of upset vapers!
I know some people who already make their own vape fluid, A booming underground market will be the result.
Just when you think there must be a limit to what pointless things people will do and dumbassed subcultures some people will join. Why not just give up ?
Nice response to Dodgy Dave's Acropolis Now "joke":
So not only does this Prime Minister see fit to talk down our Country at every turn, he also see it necessary to make a joke at Greece's expense, where many of its people are suffering daily. This 'man' is an ass. In addition, I understand that it was the EU's puppets who smashed their economy.
EU didn't smash their economy...The Greeks torpedoed their own economy. A place where paying tax is more an act of charity than a civil requirement.
The Greeks didn't help for sure, but being asked to pay shedloads of cash to prop up French and German banks is a scandal. Even the IMF said the EU prescription was wrong, and that Greece had no chance of paying off its debt and all the EU was doing was making matters worse by lending them money to pay the interest on debts to credits, rather than actually make the situation better.
The French and German banks should have been forced to take results of their crap investment decisions in the teeth. If you or I lend money to a business and it can't pay its bills, we lose our money and ultimately go bust. If you are a French or German bank you lend money to known bad risks and you get propped up by your government who also holds a gun to your creditors head and demands they borrow money off them to repay you.
'it looks more and more likely, to me, that the EU will collapse or radically change, anyway, in the next 5-10 years, given ongoing eurogeddon, migration crises. etc. This will perforce mean chaos, and then some form of Brexit: an associate membership.'
Variations of that particular delusion i.e. 'it will all collapse anyway', 'political integration/euro will never happen anyway' have been doing the rounds for many, many years.
They are just that - delusions. Don't give in to them. We change what we want to change only by our own efforts.
Lose with Trump or lose with Cruz or lose with Rubio with Trump a likely spoiler.
The difficulty for the GOP is that they are unable to reconcile a viable general election candidate with their desire for ideological purity or a populist head banger during the nomination race.
The advantage of losing with Trump is that he'll shake them out of some of the entrenched positions they've dug themselves into that nobody can oppose for fear of heresy, but aren't actually very popular even with right-wing voters. The example Noah Smith was giving the other day was opposing spending money to repair roads.
I'm not so sure.
When McCain lost in 08 we heard some GOP figures note that they had to widen their base and not alienate moderate, swing and minority voters especially the growing hispanic vote.
Ooppps.
The conservatives' reply to that would be that it was tried in 2012 and failed - though in reality, Romney messed up a winnable election himself; it wasn't his positioning that cost him the election, it was his campaigning.
In fairness to McCain and Romney they were both up against a great campaigner in Obama. However they both had to tack rightward to secure the nomination that compromised their general election strategy.
The GOP picked poor candidates and/or better candidates did not put themselves forward. Does the GOP mitigate against good candidates?
Mr. Nabavi, except that you aren't even offering an argument against Cameron being full of shit over this referendum and the tidal wave of woe that will apparently engulf us if we vote Leave.
He's making his case, very well. The Leavers don't like it, and I don't blame them for that. I do blame them for not offering a coherent alternative. I warned four years ago that there was a hell of a lot of work they needed to do if they were to address the 'leap in the dark' problem, and they haven't done it. Worse still, they can't even agree on the number one issue of the whole referendum, namely freedom of movement.
In broad terms I still don't see the attraction for Leave in pinning itself to one faction of sceptics, but the issue of free movement does need addressing. It looks like there is a significant faction that want to leave but opt for an EEA/EFTA type arrangement which will necessitate continued free movement of labour but I really don't understand the basis on which this is attractive. Can any Leavers here who favour that option enlighten me?
Sovereignty. Democracy.
Freedom to agree your own trade deals outside of Europe.
Little stuff.
Sovereignty is a sliding scale related to the power of those around you; it's not like we don't have it now and will have it if we switch to a different open borders arrangement, surely? Ditto democracy: we'll have less democratic input into the European institutions than at present, but they would still have significant influence over major elements of our economy. It's not clear that either of these are improved by an EEA option.
Own trade deals outside Europe? Fair point maybe, do Switzerland/Norway have greater freedom to agree bilaterals than we do at present?
Sovereignty is an absolute. Sometimes the government decides that it is the right thing to do to enter into international commitments (e.g. NATO, WTO) which limit their freedom of action but which they judge the benefits outweigh the costs. The difference is that those limitations are strictly defined and we can't be forced to do anything against the wishes of our government.
Democracy: how can British voters sack the majority of MEPs if they don't like the decisions that they are taking?
I am in the strange yet unexciting position of edging nearer to REMAIN, while being slightly more convinced of a LEAVE victory.
My reasoning, such as it is: it looks more and more likely, to me, that the EU will collapse or radically change, anyway, in the next 5-10 years, given ongoing eurogeddon, migration crises. etc. This will perforce mean chaos, and then some form of Brexit: an associate membership.
Why add to the chaos, and why risk even more chaos, right now? There will be a more sensible and propitious time to tiptoe away from Brussels, and it will probably come very soon. And we will get a better deal, as there will be all to play for.
I'm not convinced of this argument, but it is swaying me. I am about 55% STAY at the moment (this could change after lunch, or after some particularly pompous, nauseating, sanctimonious post from Richard Nabavi, who is doing a good one man campaign for LEAVE)
Against that, the more I look at the turnout question, the more it seems to favour LEAVE. Oldies are very much LEAVE. LEAVERS are way more motivated. Turnout will be crucial, and when you look at those certain to vote, LEAVE is significantly ahead.
That's my one pence worth, pre lunch.
It won't. As an example, people have been predicting the collapse of the euro for several years, saying it couldn't possibly survive the forces against it. The reality is it has limped on, driven by political rather than economic imperatives, and simply inflicted greater and greater hardship on some of its inmates. The same will be true of the EU. It won't collapse, not until it's got a lot poorer, a lot more run down, and a lot more overrun (see the latest moves regarding Turkey). What you're suggesting is like staying in a house you don't like because a hurricane is likely to blow it down and it will be replaced by something you do like. Not sensible even if it happens. Best to be out at a time of our choosing.
Your instincts are telling you Leave, and they are right.
Those leavers would leave our rat defences unmanned while they're keeping out immigrants. The burgeoning black rat population is an obvious risk. Unless, of course, we have antibiotics. But the antibiotics are dependent on immigration, so it's a double whammy.
Unless of course, the back death wasn't actually spread by black rats - which is still only a theory.
Mr. Nabavi, the point is that some in the Remain campaign, such as the PM, are stating the Leave option is tantamount to economic suicide and would leave us dangerously exposed to terrorism and the Black Death. If it's that bad, why's he even giving us the option? Parents don't ask their children if they'd like cheese, ham, or razorblades in their sandwiches.
You are the one sounding rattled today - can you provide the link to Cameron - or anyone -saying Brexit would expose us to the Black Death?
Ah I see hyperbole is allowed for the nutjobs. Glad we cleared that upG
"Brussels tax hike to send e-cigarette price soaring"
I foresee a lot of upset vapers!
I know some people who already make their own vape fluid, A booming underground market will be the result.
Just when you think there must be a limit to what pointless things people will do and dumbassed subcultures some people will join. Why not just give up ?
Have you considered that some people may enjoy it?
I'm quite happy for there to be a referendum, as I don't believe that the predictions of doom and disaster amount to a hill of beans.
Fair enough, there's a disagreement on that. Cameron is doing exactly what he said he would, giving people the choice, and arguing his case. Good for him, on both counts.
Leaving the eu on Farage's terms eg no memebership of eea, or indeed anything' would be bad. Also the anti black muslim foreigner tide unleashed by Farage and his BNPlite would be bad. We have the referendum based on the need to protect us from the ez. I am happy with that. Both sides do not want to remind us that simply being in the eea would leave us not much different to now.
So you have said, repeated in, actually, not many different ways at all. Between you and Scott'n'Paste its like trying to have a conversation with a photocopier.
How about this .... The NHS is dependent on unlimited immigration and economic success. With Brexit, the NHS collapses, bodies lie in the streets, the black rat population surges, and without antibiotics, we all die.
Mr. Nabavi, the point is that some in the Remain campaign, such as the PM, are stating the Leave option is tantamount to economic suicide and would leave us dangerously exposed to terrorism and the Black Death. If it's that bad, why's he even giving us the option? Parents don't ask their children if they'd like cheese, ham, or razorblades in their sandwiches.
You are the one sounding rattled today - can you provide the link to Cameron - or anyone -saying Brexit would expose us to the Black Death?
Ah I see hyperbole is allowed for the nutjobs. Glad we cleared that upG
I am not sure I would class Mr Dancer as a nutjob, you on the other hand....
I am in the strange yet unexciting position of edging nearer to REMAIN, while being slightly more convinced of a LEAVE victory.
Lol, we have been predicting for weeks that when push came to shove you would come over all ponceyboots, hell, even you have predicted it.... and lo it came to pass
Very little polling to go on in Maine, Kansas and Louisiana, which vote for the GOP nomination in only three days time...
Anyone got any hunches?
I would have thought ME and LA could be strongly Trump, but KS harder to call, after OK.
"Trump sits atop the Republican field in Kansas, while Rubio faces an uphill battle. Polling released Friday from Fort Hays State University’s Docking Institute of Public Affairs showed Rubio coming in third in the state. In the poll, Trump sat at 26 percent, Sen. Ted Cruz snagged 14 percent and Rubio had 13 percent.
Yet, the poll also revealed a large swath of undecided voters still up for grabs. According to the poll, 39 percent had yet to make up their minds."
That was before Kobach endorsed.
Should all go Trump but Kasich will be challenging in Maine (though Governor endorsed Trump) and Cruz could do well in LA (though demographics more like AL) and KS.
Mr. Nabavi, except that you aren't even offering an argument against Cameron being full of shit over this referendum and the tidal wave of woe that will apparently engulf us if we vote Leave.
He's making his case, very well. The Leavers don't like it, and I don't blame them for that. I do blame them for not offering a coherent alternative. I warned four years ago that there was a hell of a lot of work they needed to do if they were to address the 'leap in the dark' problem, and they haven't done it. Worse still, they can't even agree on the number one issue of the whole referendum, namely freedom of movement.
Sovereignty. Democracy.
Freedom to agree your own trade deals outside of Europe.
Little stuff.
Sovereignty is a sliding scale related to the power of those around you; it's not like we don't have it now and will have it if we switch to a different open borders arrangement, surely? Ditto democracy: we'll have less democratic input into the European institutions than at present, but they would still have significant influence over major elements of our economy. It's not clear that either of these are improved by an EEA option.
Own trade deals outside Europe? Fair point maybe, do Switzerland/Norway have greater freedom to agree bilaterals than we do at present?
Sovereignty is an absolute. Sometimes the government decides that it is the right thing to do to enter into international commitments (e.g. NATO, WTO) which limit their freedom of action but which they judge the benefits outweigh the costs. The difference is that those limitations are strictly defined and we can't be forced to do anything against the wishes of our government.
Democracy: how can British voters sack the majority of MEPs if they don't like the decisions that they are taking?
If I understand the arbitration methods in TTIP, just to pick one example which is currently at the forefront of discussion, then limitations on sovereignty accepted by government won't be unambiguous or strictly defined. Any treaty realistically is designed to compel us to do stuff that may be against the wishes of the government of the day, by stacking it with benefits that they don't want to lose. I don't see why the EU treaties are qualitatively different in relation to sovereignty; certainly not why they are qualitatively different to EEA agreements.
On democracy, I guess that is a question that would find some resonance with Scottish or Cornish voters when looking at Westminster. Or voters in safe seats under FPTP. Or.... and so on. Is the EU's democratic deficit really offensively worse than the other ones we accept?
'it looks more and more likely, to me, that the EU will collapse or radically change, anyway, in the next 5-10 years, given ongoing eurogeddon, migration crises. etc. This will perforce mean chaos, and then some form of Brexit: an associate membership.'
Variations of that particular delusion i.e. 'it will all collapse anyway', 'political integration/euro will never happen anyway' have been doing the rounds for many, many years.
They are just that - delusions. Don't give in to them. We change what we want to change only by our own efforts.
There is a great quote from the British minister / ambassador at the talks that led to the ECSC way back in the early 1950s along those lines, that the conference would never agree on the proposals; if it did agree, the treaty would never be ratified; if it was ratified, it would never be implemented; and if it was implemented, it would never work.
Unfortunately, I can't find the quote but it does sum up one of the problems of the British attitude to the EU and its forebears over the decades.
The new Iron Curtain holding back the hordes: The 19-mile barbed wire fence built on Macedonia's border to stop a human tide of migrants as Greece is told it faces being 'sacrificed' to save the EU
Macedonia is not in the EU. The migration crisis is not going away, and not going to be resolved by leaving the EU.
Closing the borders in the Balkans will cause problems in the reception camps in Greece (the EU has today promised more aid for this) but word will soon get back to the migrants in Turkey that the border is closed and disincentivise other arrivals. Ideally arrivals would be deported back to Turkey on arrival, unless they claim asylum on landing. It is what illegal migrants get at any other border.
And there is me thinking that the Kippers wanted the EU to take a tougher line.
Very little polling to go on in Maine, Kansas and Louisiana, which vote for the GOP nomination in only three days time...
Anyone got any hunches?
I would have thought ME and LA could be strongly Trump, but KS harder to call, after OK.
LA is a Texas satellite, like Oklahoma, so Cruz should do well there.
Interesting. KY also votes, which I'm presuming goes Trump, based on recent polling.
Any chance of Kasich taking Maine?
If Cruz somehow edges out Trump in terms of states won on Saturday, i.e. 2,1,1, could that be a game changer, with the Donald clearly faltering?
I think Trump is going to be the Republican presidential nominee. The real battle is for the VP spot, between Christie, Kasich and Cruz. After last night I guess it's going to be Cruz, though I'd prefer Christie.
Mr. Nabavi, except that you aren't even offering an argument against Cameron being full of shit over this referendum and the tidal wave of woe that will apparently engulf us if we vote Leave.
He's making his case, very well. The Leavers don't like it, and I don't blame them for that. I do blame them for not offering a coherent alternative. I warned four years ago that there was a hell of a lot of work they needed to do if they were to address the 'leap in the dark' problem, and they haven't done it. Worse still, they can't even agree on the number one issue of the whole referendum, namely freedom of movement.
In broad terms I still don't see the attraction for Leave in pinning itself to one faction of sceptics, but the issue of free movement does need addressing. It looks like there is a significant faction that want to leave but opt for an EEA/EFTA type arrangement which will necessitate continued free movement of labour but I really don't understand the basis on which this is attractive. Can any Leavers here who favour that option enlighten me?
Sovereignty. Democracy.
Freedom to agree your own trade deals outside of Europe.
Little stuff.
Sovereignty is a sliding scale related to the power of those around you; it's not like we don't have it now and will have it if we switch to a different open borders arrangement, surely? Ditto democracy: we'll have less democratic input into the European institutions than at present, but they would still have significant influence over major elements of our economy. It's not clear that either of these are improved by an EEA option.
Own trade deals outside Europe? Fair point maybe, do Switzerland/Norway have greater freedom to agree bilaterals than we do at present?
Democracy: how can British voters sack the majority of MEPs if they don't like the decisions that they are taking?
By voting REMAIN we are in fact deciding that the unit of 'demos' that counts is not the British people. It is the EU people. We will have chosen to subsume ourselves in a bigger, more powerful whole. We cease to choose our own leaders. Or rather we will, but not at the UK level. Power will reside above us.
"EFTA Secretariat has 9% of EU laws adopted by Norway so where does the 75% claim from the FO come from?"
Neil "How many EU laws does Switzerland write in? Hancock = dont know. Neil = its zero
Project lie exposed...
''The Swiss approach is complex, consisting of a set of disparate sector-specific bilateral agreements developed over time, including on Schengen but excluding financial services, together with much informal Europeanisation, including autonomous adoption of EU law. '' ''the Swiss financial sector has, so far, benefited from largely unfettered access to the EU market, often through its presence in London. New EU regulations could change this. Tighter regulations would mean third countries constantly having to amend their parallel legislation, in line with any changes in Single Market legislation, in order to maintain equivalence over the course of time.'' ''Switzerland’s bilateral approach has been a means of moving closer to the EU rather than maintaining distance – and around 40% of Swiss legislation derives from EU rules. '' ''Maintaining Switzerland’s level of access to the Single Market requires continual closeness to the EU. A Free Trade agreement is not sufficient, especially for the financial sector. Maintaining access to European capital markets necessitates formal agreements and parallel legislation to that of the EU. '' ''Forgoing complete access to theSingle Market has had implications for the Swiss financial services sector, namely through the associated necessity of establishing operations in London, and has reduced Switzerland’s ability to engage in EU policy making.''
The new Iron Curtain holding back the hordes: The 19-mile barbed wire fence built on Macedonia's border to stop a human tide of migrants as Greece is told it faces being 'sacrificed' to save the EU
Macedonia is not in the EU. The migration crisis is not going away, and not going to be resolved by leaving the EU.
Closing the borders in the Balkans will cause problems in the reception camps in Greece (the EU has today promised more aid for this) but word will soon get back to the migrants in Turkey that the border is closed and disincentivise other arrivals. Ideally arrivals would be deported back to Turkey on arrival, unless they claim asylum on landing. It is what illegal migrants get at any other border.
And there is me thinking that the Kippers wanted the EU to take a tougher line.
You make fair points in reply to increasing hysteria from Plato and of course the Daily Mail. This sad crisis is nothing to do with the EU or membership,of the EU and the mention of Turkey shows that these people are not fleeing a war zone but a safe democratic country.
Comments
Norman Lamont making the very same point on the DP right now.
Anyone got any hunches?
I would have thought ME and LA could be strongly Trump, but KS harder to call, after OK.
Chris Burke
If you mute this Trump speech, it looks like they're holding a bachelor auction but no one will bid on Chris Christie.
Why not just give up ?
The French and German banks should have been forced to take results of their crap investment decisions in the teeth. If you or I lend money to a business and it can't pay its bills, we lose our money and ultimately go bust. If you are a French or German bank you lend money to known bad risks and you get propped up by your government who also holds a gun to your creditors head and demands they borrow money off them to repay you.
Variations of that particular delusion i.e. 'it will all collapse anyway', 'political integration/euro will never happen anyway' have been doing the rounds for many, many years.
They are just that - delusions. Don't give in to them. We change what we want to change only by our own efforts.
Any chance of Kasich taking Maine?
If Cruz somehow edges out Trump in terms of states won on Saturday, i.e. 2,1,1, could that be a game changer, with the Donald clearly faltering?
Democracy: how can British voters sack the majority of MEPs if they don't like the decisions that they are taking?
Your instincts are telling you Leave, and they are right.
Those leavers would leave our rat defences unmanned while they're keeping out immigrants. The burgeoning black rat population is an obvious risk. Unless, of course, we have antibiotics. But the antibiotics are dependent on immigration, so it's a double whammy.
Unless of course, the back death wasn't actually spread by black rats - which is still only a theory.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/01/europes-depression-is-deliberate-eu-choice-says-former-bank-of-e/
How about this .... The NHS is dependent on unlimited immigration and economic success. With Brexit, the NHS collapses, bodies lie in the streets, the black rat population surges, and without antibiotics, we all die.
New Thread New Thread
Yet, the poll also revealed a large swath of undecided voters still up for grabs. According to the poll, 39 percent had yet to make up their minds."
That was before Kobach endorsed.
Should all go Trump but Kasich will be challenging in Maine (though Governor endorsed Trump) and Cruz could do well in LA (though demographics more like AL) and KS.
On democracy, I guess that is a question that would find some resonance with Scottish or Cornish voters when looking at Westminster. Or voters in safe seats under FPTP. Or.... and so on. Is the EU's democratic deficit really offensively worse than the other ones we accept?
Unfortunately, I can't find the quote but it does sum up one of the problems of the British attitude to the EU and its forebears over the decades.
Closing the borders in the Balkans will cause problems in the reception camps in Greece (the EU has today promised more aid for this) but word will soon get back to the migrants in Turkey that the border is closed and disincentivise other arrivals. Ideally arrivals would be deported back to Turkey on arrival, unless they claim asylum on landing. It is what illegal migrants get at any other border.
And there is me thinking that the Kippers wanted the EU to take a tougher line.
agreements developed over time, including on Schengen but excluding financial
services, together with much informal Europeanisation, including autonomous adoption
of EU law. ''
''the Swiss financial sector has, so far, benefited from largely unfettered access to the EU market, often through its presence in London. New EU regulations could change this. Tighter regulations would mean third countries constantly having to amend their parallel legislation, in line with any changes in Single Market legislation, in order to maintain equivalence over the
course of time.''
''Switzerland’s bilateral approach has been a means of moving closer to the EU rather
than maintaining distance – and around 40% of Swiss legislation derives from EU rules. ''
''Maintaining Switzerland’s level of access to the Single Market requires continual
closeness to the EU. A Free Trade agreement is not sufficient, especially for the financial
sector. Maintaining access to European capital markets necessitates formal agreements and parallel legislation to that of the EU. ''
''Forgoing complete access to theSingle Market has had implications for the Swiss financial services sector, namely through the associated necessity of establishing operations in London, and has reduced Switzerland’s ability to engage in EU policy making.''
(Report prepared for the City of London Corporation by The University of Kent Centre for Swiss Politics April 2013)
https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/business/economic-research-and-information/research-publications/Documents/research-2013/Switzerlands-approach-to-EU-engagement.pdf
This sad crisis is nothing to do with the EU or membership,of the EU and the mention of Turkey shows that these people are not fleeing a war zone but a safe democratic country.