Tailbone Injury Pilates

Pure scaremongering

The initiative was compatible with the expulsion of persons not, says a legal opinion from the University of Zurich, which was commissioned by the FDP in order. The EU had already forbidden to members several times an automatic expulsion, and France had escaped because of the Roma deportations of an action only just.

The FDP accuses the SVP to attack with their initiative once again the movement of persons. The movement of persons is a fundamental pillar of the EU. The EU would hardly be tolerated in Switzerland, which does not tolerate it among their members. If the initiative adopted, would be expected to Switzerland with reprisals by the EU, up to and including termination of persons. Because of the guillotine clause, then all other bilateral agreements would be terminated. The bilateral approach would be the end.

Switzerland is still not an EU member and a sovereign state. The expulsion initiative responds to a need of the population. If the sovereign chooses to accept the initiative, he shall do so without pressure and threats by the EU. Finally, the initiative creates a controlling valve to a fehlschgeschlagenen asylum policy of the government, which has led, together with the first persons on the situation, a Ausschaffungsinitiave ever made it necessary.

For Switzerland it would be a godsend if the EU would terminate the movement of persons. And although the fall still unspeakable remaining bilateral agreements, the better. Although the people have voted on the bilateral path and this is approved, but now much of the Yes-voters have realized that they were deceived by the Federal Council and parties.

So what could happen in Switzerland better than an end to the bilateral approach? But unfortunately it will not come so far. Switzerland is the EU's much too important. Even before the adoption of the minaret initiative was warned, but is not happened. Even after adoption of the deportation initiative will pass nothing.

The slogan for the 28th November is therefore still YES. And NO to the counter-proposal.