Sign in / up

back to article UK will be 'cut off' from 'full intelligence picture' after Brexit – Europol strategy man

The UK will “certainly be cut off from the full intelligence picture” after Brexit, Europol's acting head of strategy for cybercrime warned The Register. This comes after UK law enforcement agencies from the National Crime Agency to Police Scotland have been meeting with Europol in an attempt to mitigate this. Phillipp Amann, …

COMMENTS

Post your comment
House rules Send corrections
Add to 'My topics' unstar *

Page:

  1. alain williams Silver badge

    Yet more Brexit nonsense

    If it is seen as important by the politicians then it will be possible; there would need to be agreements about things like data protection and funding of services. Until negotiations have happened we just don't know if UK politicians still want to be part of it and their EU counterparts want us to work with them.

    I suspect hidden agendas in pronouncements such as this that we have seen from many organisations.

    39 3 Reply
    1. Voland's right hand Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Yet more Brexit nonsense

      Politicians represent interests.

      The level of sharing between Europol and "Independent" UK is mostly a DPA matter.

      _ALL_ Eu countries have some level of vested interest in "Independent" UK being deemed DPA-unsafe. The unsafer, the better (for them). Every notch of unsafeness is one more Datacenter and one more piece of business by a Eu company which is presently run in Slough or somewhere else in the UK being moved to Ireland, Scandinavia or Eastern Europe. It is the same as with other business. One less Nissan factory in Sunderland is one more Nissan factory in let's say Varna or Timishoara.

      So, I do not quite see this opinion as a hidden agenda case. It is more of a realistic assessment.

      After the initial dismay, Europe is now looking at the UK the way vultures are looking at a fresh roadkill. Quoting Ice age: "And it looks like there might be a fatality. I call the dark meat". That attitude does not quite facilitate any sharing any time soon.

      26 3 Reply
      1. Mark 65
        Reply Icon

        Re: Yet more Brexit nonsense

        But that's the issue too - these muppets think that France etc will reap the rewards whereas the most likely beneficiary is and always has been Ireland. Much like the finance industry. Move to Paris where they love their 35 hour week and a good protest march or move to Dublin where they also speak English and you could probably get by with just a shell office?

        3 0 Reply
        1. Uberseehandel
          Reply Icon

          Re: Yet more Brexit nonsense

          The problem with Ireland as a post-Brexit alternative to the UK is that there is a shortage of infrastructure and services and the indigenous workforce does not always have the training required to fulfil roles that an organisation might expect to fill using local staff.

          Most large organisations know this already. For a corporation it is more convenient to be located in central Europe than on the (Celtic) fringe, closer to customers, closer to suppliers.

          0 0 Reply
          1. nematoad
            Reply Icon

            Re: Yet more Brexit nonsense

            "...there is a shortage of infrastructure and services and the indigenous workforce does not always have the training required..."

            Bollocks.

            As someone who has worked in IT in the Republic of Ireland I know that there are plenty of skilled people and resources to do the job.

            Don't forget that Dell, Apple and so on have sites there and the pool of talent is constantly refreshed by the excellent education Ireland provides.

            Ireland has close links with the US, just look at the number of Green cards allocated to Ireland. Also with the likes of Shannon and Dublin Airports travel is straightforward.

            True the population is a tad small but with the advantage of the English language and the close US ties I see no obstacle to many more US companies moving across the Irish Sea.

            Oh, a last thought. The 12.5% corporate tax rate helps as well. If you even pay that as Apple has so ably demonstrated.

            1 0 Reply
            1. Anonymous Coward
              Reply Icon
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Yet more Brexit nonsense

              or maybe emmigration from the UK to get Jobs (not Steve) could fill any gap in personnel numbers

              0 0 Reply
            2. Anonymous Coward
              Reply Icon
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: Yet more Brexit nonsense

              Plus Ireland just has to draw talent from the UK if it's got a lack on it's own soil which frankly is a VERY easy task as I know many people who would jump at the chance, myself included to scoot over to Ireland and live in the EU than stay in the UK when we're outside in the cold banging on the door wondering why nobody is listening to us anymore.

              1 1 Reply
    2. Yes Me Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Facepalm

      Re: Yet more Brexit nonsense

      What part of not being part of governance decisions don't you understand? This is an aspect that was often pointed out during the referendum campaign, but it was convenient for the Leave liars to ignore it: if you're not in the club, you don't make the rules. It applies to every single EU regulation that affects trade or business with the EU from the outside, and Europol is just one example among hundreds. And it's not negotiable - limited access to data is negotiable, but access to decision making is clearly not. Of course, when Ms May finally admits that all Brexit scenarios are lousy so she won't be invoking Article 50 any time soon, we may be fortunate enough to draw back from the brink.

      12 11 Reply
  2. Voland's right hand Silver badge

    Data protection directive

    Well, sharing some data will be outright illegal after that, at least until the DPA arrangement between Eu and UK is sorted out.

    Considering the legislative intent of Teresa May as it stands, the likelihood of that one sorted out is even less than access to common market while introducing immigration controls.

    12 1 Reply
    1. I ain't Spartacus Gold badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Data protection directive

      You can always make stuff no longer illegal, by changing the rules. There'll have to be an amendment to the EU treaties in order for the UK to leave - plus there's plenty of time to amend or draught any laws required.

      Whether Europol data is shared is entirely down to the political choices made in the upcoming negotiations. Actually so is the link between freedom of movement and the single market. It is a political choice that I think the rest of the EU are likely to refuse full single market access without full freedom of movement - though you can make that claim and still save face by making the costs in loss of access so small as to be meaningless. This is pure politics - not the laws of physics.

      As a guide to the readiness for cooperation in this area though, the UK now holds the new post of EU Commissioner for The Security Union - which has been defined as anti-terrorism and criminal intelligence sharing. Admittedly it was the Commission who created that job, and the member states who will decide the Brexit negotiations, but I doubt Juncker's too out-of-step with what they want.

      2 0 Reply
  3. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Paris Hilton

    Okay, riddle me this

    1. The more effective Interpol shares data outside EU countries, no problem. Is this too difficult for Europol?

    2. From Whackypedia: The Director of Europol is able to enter into agreements for Europol with both countries and internal organizations. Europol cooperates on an operational basis with: Albania, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Republic of Macedonia, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, the United States and Interpol.[15]

    It has strategic agreements with: Bosnia and Herzegovina, Moldova, Russia, Turkey, Ukraine, United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime and the World Customs Organization.[15]

    So where's the cutting off, apart from his nose to spite his face?

    32 3 Reply
    1. rtfazeberdee
      Reply Icon

      Re: Okay, riddle me this

      "So where's the cutting off, apart from his nose to spite his face?" - thats called Brexit

      23 25 Reply
    2. Len
      Reply Icon

      Re: Okay, riddle me this

      Read the article:

      “If you're part of the EU you have full access to all of the information systems we have. If you are a non-EU member but we have an operational agreement then we can still share operational data,” Amann explained, “but you won't have access to certain systems and also you certainly wouldn't have access and you wouldn't be part of any governance group that would decide on the priorities.”

      Yes, an operational agreement can be put in place, no, it won't give access to all the systems that the UK can currently access.

      25 0 Reply
      1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Facepalm

        Re: Len Re: Okay, riddle me this

        ".....Yes, an operational agreement can be put in place, no, it won't give access to all the systems that the UK can currently access." Not to worry, I'm sure the GCHQ and UK Police are the main populators of all the useful data in the Europol databases anyway. The limits on inter-country sharing of data inside the EU have been made horrifically obvious by the ease with which the Deash mounted the Paris attacks and Brussels bombings, all committed by known criminals with known connections to Islamic extremists. It seems whatever data is in the Europol databases the EU seem unable to make practical security use of it.

        What isn't sourced from the UK the GCHQ will probably be accessing anyway, or getting via existing agreements with the NSA, FBI, DEA, DIA (and a host of non-EU police and intelligence forces).

        This is just another pointless Eurosulk.

        16 7 Reply
      2. Mark 65
        Reply Icon

        Re: Okay, riddle me this

        Yes, an operational agreement can be put in place, no, it won't give access to all the systems that the UK can currently access.

        GCHQ might disagree with that premise.

        2 0 Reply
      3. Manni
        Reply Icon

        Re: Okay, riddle me this

        "Yes, an operational agreement can be put in place"

        These agreements are mostly controlled or heavily influenced by the US-Government, a phone call from May to Obama will see to it that British wishes will be heard and followed by the EU.

        "it won't give access to all the systems that the UK can currently access."

        Why should Britain care? Having plenty of spy-systems of their own, Echelon, just to quote one of them, they will get all the data they want this way or via another country having access to it. So far the government and Gloustershire never cared about legality, so what's new?

        1 0 Reply
    3. Voland's right hand Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Okay, riddle me this

      There are very different operational arrangement levels.

      The "operational arrangement" with Macedonia did not even involve stolen car VINs at some point (not sure if it does now) resulting in one of the police heads (if not the minister of the interior or the prosecutor general himself - do not remember off the top of my head) being picked up at the border crossing with Bulgaria while driving a stolen BMW which he apparently bought legally from a local car dealership in Skopie.

      The present level of cooperation with Russia is probably even less than that.

      If the UK wants _THAT_ level of operational arrangement, well, that should not be a problem.

      12 1 Reply
    4. Commswonk
      Reply Icon

      Re: Okay, riddle me this

      Dan 55 posted: From Whackypedia: The Director of Europol is able to enter into agreements for Europol with both countries and internal organizations. Europol cooperates on an operational basis with: Albania, Australia, Canada, Colombia, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Republic of Macedonia, Monaco, Montenegro, Norway, Serbia, Switzerland, the United States and Interpol

      It might have been worth including the next section, which reads:

      Despite being funded by the EU, Europol has been found to have gaps between the funds allocated and its operational results achieved.

      Its weakness lies in its very formalized structure, which causes loss of flexibility and its poor management of their multiple centres that control its operating activities.

      Due to its information collection and analysis core, it is unable to actually search for information, i.e. no system to find persons or things, no resources for wiretapping etc. and is consequently deprived of the most important function in terms of operational efficiency.

      There lacks sufficient representation of customs and border protection at Europol as well as a clear division of tasks between Europol and other EU institutions such as CEPOL or Frontex.

      Though Europol focuses a large amount on anti-terrorism, it’s reputation is rather poor in this area. It lacks potential in its anti-terrorism department to take effective action against terrorism, especially because it is not included in the Club de Berne (the largest anti-terrorism forum in the EU) and because there are many EU member states, (UK for one example) who are the source of Europol’s information, which do not completely trust Europol.

      -----------------------------------------

      Hardly a ringing endorsement...

      19 0 Reply
    5. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Okay, riddle me this

      He said that operational data could still be shared. But it will lose full access to the internal databases and - obviously - not be a part of the priority-setting mechanism. Sovereignty goes both ways.

      5 0 Reply
  4. yowl00
    Happy

    And they've been doing such a good job, what a loss for poor Blighty.

    27 2 Reply
    1. Baldy50
      Reply Icon

      Yep not fit for purpose considering the attacks the EU countries have endured recently.

      5 1 Reply
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Yep, lilly livered European politicians have set up a borderless EU without remembering that the nastier aspects of life also has to be dealt with. Some sage professional pointed out that you can't have separate police forces and intelligence operations unless you also have border controls between those policing and intelligence zones. With open borders, they're all at the level of the weakest police force and intelligence outfit in Europe, with nice autoroutes and high speed trains to carry bad guys anywhere unhindered.

      It's also interesting to note how the Germans, whose politicians put on a good display of righteous indignation over the Snowden revelations, turn out to have been up to a lot of the same tricks themselves. It paints a picture of German politicians also being completely uninterested in and un-inquiring of policing and intelligence. That doesn't bode well for the future.

      Government rule of thumb. Shit happens. A lot more shit will happen unless you do something about it. Avoid all things that lead to a greater potential for more shit happening. If European politicians can't see the pile of shit and see that shit has to be dealt with promptly and seriously, there's going to be a shit load more shit to deal with, again.

      2 1 Reply
      1. Warm Braw
        Reply Icon

        You can't have separate police forces ... unless you also have border controls

        I think there are 40 separate territorial police forces in England and Wales, of varying degrees of competence and resourcing. Where do you want he checkpoints?

        0 0 Reply
    3. phuzz Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      There's not any way to tell if they're doing a good job or not, because we don't have a backup EU without Europol sharing data to compare to.

      They might have prevented loads of attacks, there's no easy way to make a comparison.

      0 0 Reply
  5. 0laf

    As I understood it was not the majority of information going from us to them? The UK also being an intermediary for US intelligence.

    25 1 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      That is certainly a good outcome for the likes of Europol and the EU governments: the US will now have to work with the EU directly.

      0 0 Reply
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Or just not bother.

        0 0 Reply
  6. CAPS LOCK

    Anyone who thinks the UK won't have accesss to some data or other needs to look at this:

    https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/RAF+Menwith+Hill/@54.0084687,-1.6897814,501m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m5!3m4!1s0x487bfe3e04ce4faf:0x11b0a7dda5967190!8m2!3d54.0148835!4d-1.6910576!6m1!1e1

    9 0 Reply
    1. Matt Bryant Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Anyone who thinks the UK won't have accesss to some data or other needs to look at this:

      Cough*BUDE*cough*TEMPORA*cough.

      2 1 Reply
  7. Drefsab_UK

    hmm true but last I heard the UK is part of the 5 eyes.

    that actually consists of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.

    Not Europe. So access to that will remain, and tbh the UK's inteligence network is world class, europe loose access to that from us as well as us loosing access to theirs.

    So what happens when both sides have something the other want, they establish a treaty to trade. They will have to be renegotiated just like very other type of exchange between europe and the UK.

    Sure some countries are going to make big noises about it they want people to come to them and see brexit as an opertunity. Nothing new nothing to see.

    23 1 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Probably what this Euro-official was after. "Let me publicly pressure the Brits to continue sharing with us fully after they leave, or else we lose 40% of our intelligence feeds"

      7 2 Reply
      1. Missing Semicolon Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Happy

        Fog in Channel

        ... continent cut off.

        5 0 Reply
  8. nematoad
    Unhappy

    Bloody hell.

    This just seems to get worse and worse. First it looks as if we will not be able to take advantage of the Single market. Then the banks are getting twitchy over the possible loss of "passporting" that allows them to move money from country to country. Then it's possible that we will have to rely on WTO rules for trade when we leave. Now we may be cut off from intelligence vital to our security. The list goes on and on.

    So I ask, what the hell was the point of voting to leave? We aren't going to get the mythical £350 million to spend on the NHS. If we do get the right to restrict immigration our economy may suffer a big hit, although the points based system promised by Leave has been ruled out by the PM. As rtfazeberdee says above that's really cutting off your nose to spite your face and doing it in grand style.

    As I have said many times, stupid, short-sighted, xenophobic and self-destructive.

    28 39 Reply
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Bloody hell.

      Why so much alarmism? I'm an outsider so I don't have a personal stake, but can it really be as bad as you say? If it is, would that not also apply to any countries nearby that aren't already in the EU? How do they survive with such self-destructive tendencies?

      BTW, when you say "xenophobic" don't you really mean "racist?" That's the preferred word in the US, anyway.

      17 4 Reply
      1. nematoad
        Reply Icon

        Re: Bloody hell.

        "BTW, when you say "xenophobic" don't you really mean "racist?""

        No, I don't. Race or the colour of a person's skin has nothing to do with what is happening in the UK post the Brexit vote. The murder of a Polish man in Harlow is being suggested as a hate crime. The man was white and until he opened his mouth I doubt if you could have told that he "Wasn't one of us."

        I used the word advisedly. Here is a definition of xenophobic from the Oxford dictionaries:

        adjective

        Having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against people from other countries:

        Pretty much like Donald Trump if you want it couched is US terms.

        16 2 Reply
      2. Jess
        Reply Icon

        Re: apply to any countries nearby that aren't already in the EU?

        That is an often quoted point on various issue, but it misses out the fact that that is the status quo.

        It is like saying a messy divorce is no problem because you were single before and there are plenty of single people who are fine.

        5 0 Reply
      3. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Bloody hell.

        Xenophobism is not racism. There's really nothing racist about the English rejecting French, German and Dutch workers. It's xenophobia - the fear of anything foreign/different.

        6 0 Reply
      4. Bernard M. Orwell
        Reply Icon
        Joke

        Re: Bloody hell.

        "BTW, when you say "xenophobic" don't you really mean "racist?" That's the preferred word in the US, anyway."

        Nah, racism relies on skin colour alone and we needed something more comprehensively inclusive, being Britain and all, so we plump for xenophobia. Lets us include all those Caucasian Europeans!

        We're progressive like that.

        3 0 Reply
      5. Tom Paine
        Reply Icon

        Re: Bloody hell.

        can it really be as bad as you say? If it is, would that not also apply to any countries nearby that aren't already in the EU? How do they survive with such self-destructive tendencies?

        If you look at an atlas^h^h google maps view of Europe's political borders, you'll notice that the UK is rather larger than, say Macedonia or Andora. Bigger population, bigger economy, much larger international profile, much more of a target for terrorists, both nazi and jihadist.

        1 0 Reply
    2. Steve Davies 3 Silver badge
      Reply Icon

      Re: Bloody hell.

      As I have said many times, stupid, short-sighted, xenophobic and self-destructive.

      Sadly the pro-Brexif Daily Fail, Express and the rest are ignoring that and painting an all is 'Rosy' picture to the rest of their supporters.

      I'd like to know if the owners and editors of those publicatinos have bolt holes in Europe ready for them to bugger off too when the UK goes belly up. The rest of us will have to stick it out and get our daily ration of 'Chicken-Little' from the government soup kitchen.

      The 25% unemployment that is seemingly the norm in southern Europe will pale into insignificance to our 40% that will surely come when any company able to deserts the sinking ship as fast s they can.

      so pro-Breciteers downvote this all you like but sooner or later the shite will hit the fan and .... well, we'll all be covered in it.

      29 29 Reply
      1. Jess
        Reply Icon

        Re: to our 40% that will surely come

        I'm not expecting it to be quite *that* bad, but I reckon we'll be lucky if our economy is only literally decimated for the next decade. (Assuming common sense doesn't prevail and we leave the EEA.)

        Back on topic, does this scenario assume Brexit = WTO? Because an EEA arrangement should preserve all this sort of stuff, shouldn't it?

        4 0 Reply
        1. Anonymous Coward
          Reply Icon
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: to our 40% that will surely come

          No, the UK will leave the WTO when it leaves the EU, unless the great powers force (EU/US/China) the WTO to ignore the rules. Considering that the WTO is absolutely crucial to world trade and especially important at a time when that trade is under scrutiny, I doubt that they are willing to do so.

          Under the rules, the UK cannot trade with WTO members as it has no agreed quota (it trades under EU quota). So it has to leave the WTO until it negotiates an agreed quota schedule with every single WTO member. But while it is outside the WTO, no WTO member can make a trade deal with it that would give it better access than WTO members get. So while it at least gets to trade, it cannot actually make trade deals.

          3 1 Reply
          1. Yes Me Silver badge
            Reply Icon

            Re: to our 40% that will surely come

            " the UK will leave the WTO when it leaves the EU"

            Rubbish. There is no connection between the two memberships.

            7 1 Reply
        2. Yes Me Silver badge
          Reply Icon
          Unhappy

          Re: to our 40% that will surely come

          "an EEA arrangement should preserve all this sort of stuff"

          Not if the stuff in question is part of an EU institution. Brexit means Brexit (which is why it would be an incredibly stupid thing to do).

          1 2 Reply
      2. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Bloody hell.

        Most of the pro-Brexit media owners don't actually live in Britain, although many of them own large amounts of property and/or land here ( hence we can be sure that our government will replace the EU payments to land owners with a similar amount taken more directly from the UK taxpayers ).

        4 0 Reply
      3. Tom Paine
        Reply Icon

        Re: Bloody hell.

        I'd like to know if the owners and editors of those publicatinos have bolt holes in Europe

        Viscount Rothermere, owner of the Daily Mail Group, is a French resident for (zero) tax purposes. I thought everyone knew that?

        1 0 Reply
    3. not.known@this.address
      Reply Icon
      Flame

      Re: Bloody hell.

      Intel-gathering is one area in which the UK definitely ranks well above our (soon to be ex-) European partners, for various reasons which really should not need repeating. To imply that WE will lose out if Europol decides not to share anything with us is like saying a record company will lose out if you never buy another one of your favourite artist's products.

      How many criminals have been extradited to the UK from mainland Europe? How many terrorist attacks in the UK were prevented because the French or German intelligence services passed on intel they had collected but GCHQ had not? I would ask how many attacks on mainland Europe have been prevented because we shared data with them but they are - quite rightly - somewhat reluctant to let us know the answer to that.

      And as for stopping bankers shifting funds from one hole to another, is that really a bad thing? If they can only try to plug gaps inside the UK then their "little" misdemeanours will come to light a lot quicker than if they can borrow increasingly large sums from other people...

      If you seriously believe that Europol would fail to pass on actionable intelligence over a hissyfit because we told the Eurocrats to go play with themselves then you need to ask yourself what would happen when such knowledge became public - knowing that someone could have prevented murder but didn't because they were too interested in scoring political points is a good way to end up with a large number of unhappy citizens. What would you say if you found out that some foreign politician sat on information that could have saved one of YOUR loved ones? "Oh well, it's all down to the people who voted to leave the EU"? Or would you want to know just What. The. F***. made some idiot in a suit think he shouldn't pass on vital information because someone else in a suit didn't like to be told 'no'?

      23 2 Reply
    4. Boris the Cockroach Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Flame

      Re: Bloody hell.

      You can be damned sure that if the EU blocks UK banks from passporting in to the EU, the reverse will done and no EU banks will get in here losiung them a shed load of business, then , just like BMW/Fiat/any other big business that sells lots into the UK, the phone will be picked up and a called made to the people in charge and "fuck up our business into the UK and we'll make sure you'll be kicked out at the next election" will be said

      The whole point of voting out for me was'nt about xenophobia, racism, stupidity or any other reason.

      I voted out because we have enough unelected twats running(ruining) our country without adding a whole bunch more based in Brussels(or Strasburg if its a monday).

      The day I (along with every other EU citizen) can elect the EU president, and an EU senate (to replace the unelected commisison) my vote switches to 'in'

      Oh well... best get my flame proof overalls on for this

      15 5 Reply
      1. John Crisp
        Reply Icon

        Re: Bloody hell.

        This is directed at Leavers in general as much as the commenter.

        "I voted out because we have enough unelected twats running(ruining) our country without adding a whole bunch more based in Brussels(or Strasburg if its a monday)."

        How many times do people need to be corrected on how the EU fundamentally works? Yes I'm lucky(ish!) as I studied it whilst studying law.

        A shame that a lot of people have not been better educated on the EU, but that would probably have been labelled as EU propaganda by Murdoch & Co.

        Vaguely... you can find much more online...

        Council of Ministers - your legally elected national representative. In reality nothing much gets done without their say so and is one of the biggest hinderances to a more democratic Europe.

        EU Parliament - democratically elected members, have become, and would continue to be increasingly powerful if people bothered to take an interest, get off their arses and vote, which most don't. Britain treats them as a joke (well Farage plays a good jester I guess) and waste an opportunity to increase democracy (if there ever really is such a thing)

        Commission - members nominated by your legally elected government. They weren't just picked off the street.

        None of the 3 bodies can make/pass laws by itself (in general terms - there are some oddities that should be resolved). They are there to balance power (the courts play a role in that too. Yes judges are unelected in the EU. The same as the UK. There's a good reason for that. Search 'separation of powers')

        "The day I (along with every other EU citizen) can elect the EU president, and an EU senate (to replace the unelected commisison) my vote switches to 'in'"

        Well you fucked any chance you had by voting out. Or did I miss the fairy story about another vote to go back in along with 350 million for the NHS ? Seems not. Too late. Missed the boat now

        For 'unelected' see above. If you had appraised yourself of the facts before you voted you may have realised the best chance of this happening (and I would like to see something along these lines myself) was by staying in, taking an interest and making your vote count in European elections.

        Instead you voted on something you really didn't understand, based on a bunch of complete lies, and shot your own nose off.

        Full marks. Give yourself a pat on the back. Sorry... did you say you had a nosebleed ? Have a Kleenex. Didn't Boris tell you it might sting a bit ?

        My own fundamental reason for staying? I don't want Europe to ever suffer the horrors of the Somme or Verdun or Normandy again. Not me, my kids, nor generations to come. Good people died so we could all live in peace. That's what the EU was meant to try and achieve first and foremost. Talk about your problems. Don't fight over them.

        I have lots of other reasons, but lets get our priorities right.

        10 5 Reply
        1. Craig100
          Reply Icon

          Re: Bloody hell.

          The democracy you speak of is too far removed from the populace to be relevant. Government needs to be local to mean anything. No point at all in something the local populace wants done being out voted at EU level by people that don't see your issue as important because they live in a different system and culture thousands of miles away. My vote for out was based on sovereignty, democracy and wanting to move forward. The EU seems to hold much stuff back. If we'd had a referendum in 1992, or whenever it switched from a Common Market to a nascent Federal Europe, I think we'd have voted out then. As for keeping the peace. NATO does that, and besides, it's not the same world as it was 70 years ago. Communications, 24hr news, travel, better informed world view........

          4 2 Reply

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

Forgotten password ?

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like