3 ms·

Switzerland had to agree to freedom of movement of persons in order to get a free trade deal with the EU. The UK, on the other hand, is flat out opposed to fre

by lottin 10y ago

Switzerland had to agree to freedom of movement of persons in order to get a free trade deal with the EU. The UK, on the other hand, is flat out opposed to freedom of movement, so it seems unlikely they'll manage to get the same conditions as the Swiss with regards to trade.

Sean1708 10y ago
> The UK, on the other hand, is flat out opposed to freedom of movement 50% of the UK is flat out opposed to freedom of movement. In fact I'd wager it's even less than that since freedom of movement wasn't the only talking point of Leave.
- tremon 10y ago
  It wasn't? It sure was the point that got the most coverage, at least here on the mainland. Other than "the EU is corrupt because we don't control it", what were the Leave side's arguments?
- pbhjpbhj 10y ago
  Freedom of movement seemed like the main issue, well "immigrants" really. It could also be a problem for people voting to remain. Indeed we weren't in the Schengen Area say if you wanted less movement within Europe then Remain could have been the right vote. The other big issue was the money we pay to Europe which was exaggerated; has the falling pound wiped out that 'saving' yet?
keithpeter 10y ago
The UK may well not exist for much longer, get used to talking about England please. Two and a half years is a long time, you may well find that enough people have sort of forgotten about EEA free movement of people requirements by the time it comes to actually leave EU and gain membership of EEA. Remember, 'enough people' is only about 500,000 or so, and that will be in the context of a general election.
mcv 10y ago
The Leave campaign was very contradictory on this point. They wanted to prevent EU citizens from freely moving to the UK, but they also claimed they could still get access to the common market like Norway or Switzerland. But you can't. They come together. And if they did decide to get both, they'd end up fairly close to the current situation, but without a vote in EU matters. It's possible the Leave campaign may have mislead the voters on this point.

by lottin 10y ago

Sean1708 10y ago

> The UK, on the other hand, is flat out opposed to freedom of movement 50% of the UK is flat out opposed to freedom of movement. In fact I'd wager it's even less than that since freedom of movement wasn't the only talking point of Leave.

tremon 10y ago
It wasn't? It sure was the point that got the most coverage, at least here on the mainland. Other than "the EU is corrupt because we don't control it", what were the Leave side's arguments?
pbhjpbhj 10y ago
Freedom of movement seemed like the main issue, well "immigrants" really. It could also be a problem for people voting to remain. Indeed we weren't in the Schengen Area say if you wanted less movement within Europe then Remain could have been the right vote. The other big issue was the money we pay to Europe which was exaggerated; has the falling pound wiped out that 'saving' yet?

keithpeter 10y ago

The UK may well not exist for much longer, get used to talking about England please. Two and a half years is a long time, you may well find that enough people have sort of forgotten about EEA free movement of people requirements by the time it comes to actually leave EU and gain membership of EEA. Remember, 'enough people' is only about 500,000 or so, and that will be in the context of a general election.

mcv 10y ago

The Leave campaign was very contradictory on this point. They wanted to prevent EU citizens from freely moving to the UK, but they also claimed they could still get access to the common market like Norway or Switzerland. But you can't. They come together. And if they did decide to get both, they'd end up fairly close to the current situation, but without a vote in EU matters. It's possible the Leave campaign may have mislead the voters on this point.