Rejection of Lisbon makes EU including Ireland less secure

[geraghd]

According to the EU's counter-terrorism chief (here), Gilles de Kerchove, the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by Irish voters makes the EU more prone to terrorism

"It is quite clear it brings so much in terms of security, so not having Lisbon prevents us from delivering security and meeting public expectations," said Mr Kerchove, who was appointed EU counter-terrorism co-ordinator last September.
"...the big problem under the EU was that security decisions had to be taken on the basis of unanimous voting at the Council of Ministers... Member states often waited until the very last moment to raise their hands and object to a proposal when unanimous voting was required, whereas if qualified majority voting was the rule, then they tended to engage and negotiate from a much earlier stage."

Lisbon would also have provided more parliamentary scrutiny over security legislation passed by the council. It would have extended the right of co-decision to the European Parliament for security and justice legislation and given national parliaments a "red card" to block proposals, according to Mr Kerchove. "One additional benefit is in the field of human rights and liberty with the charter of fundamental right and the scrutiny of the European Court of Justice."

He said losing Lisbon would dilute the ability of the EU to fight terrorism and organised crime, two issues cited by citizens as priorities for the EU.

[brio910]

He would say that - he's a well paid bureaucrat with his snout in the EU trough.

What else would you expect him to say?

'Vote No to Lisbon and retain the right to decide yourself'

[geraghd]

He would say that - he's a well paid bureaucrat with his snout in the EU trough.

What else would you expect him to say?

'Vote No to Lisbon and retain the right to decide yourself'

Or maybe he knows what he is talking about, and has more decorem than you do, knowing not to question other people's integrity without basis?
And whether Lisbon is passed or not would not affect him personally one bit (he's still on his so-called "well paid" salary, eating from the "trough") however it would affect how he does his job, which is protecting the likes of you and me.

[Just Us]

According to the EU's counter-terrorism chief (here), Gilles de Kerchove, the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by Irish voters makes the EU more prone to terrorism

He said losing Lisbon would dilute the ability of the EU to fight terrorism and organised crime, two issues cited by citizens as priorities for the EU.

More scare-mongering crap from a self-serving Eurocrat. Get used to it a chairde!

[TradCat]

What precise measures does the EU want to introduce and how does the defeat of Lisbon prevent them from doing so?

[locke]

He would say that - he's a well paid bureaucrat with his snout in the EU trough.

What else would you expect him to say?

'Vote No to Lisbon and retain the right to decide yourself'

According to the EU's counter-terrorism chief (here), Gilles de Kerchove, the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by Irish voters makes the EU more prone to terrorism

He said losing Lisbon would dilute the ability of the EU to fight terrorism and organised crime, two issues cited by citizens as priorities for the EU.

More scare-mongering crap from a self-serving Eurocrat. Get used to it a chairde!

Would you care to address his points rather than attack the man?

What precise measues does the EU want to introduce and how does the defeat of Lisbon prevent them from doing so?

Thank You

[PaintingMedium]

What precise measues does the EU want to introduce and how does the defeat of Lisbon prevent them from doing so?

Thats super secret TradCat. As our main anti-terror man says which shows his true colours:
"
He said the big problem under the EU was that security decisions had to be taken on the basis of unanimous voting at the Council of Ministers. Reaching consensus with the 27 states is not exactly a "piece of cake", said Mr Kerchove, who noted that most national parliaments do not pass legislation on the basis of 100 per cent support."

So yeah, well done fools who voted no, now it is still hard to pass very important legislation regarding terrorism. Like, it should be easy for our main man, he knows better then we do, so shut up shut up shut up

[COMMIE]

Look at www.eu-cooruption.com

I think you will find out one of the reasons we don't trust them.

[MacCoise]

According to the EU's counter-terrorism chief (here), Gilles de Kerchove, the rejection of the Lisbon Treaty by Irish voters makes the EU more prone to terrorism

"It is quite clear it brings so much in terms of security, so not having Lisbon prevents us from delivering security and meeting public expectations," said Mr Kerchove, who was appointed EU counter-terrorism co-ordinator last September.
"...the big problem under the EU was that security decisions had to be taken on the basis of unanimous voting at the Council of Ministers... Member states often waited until the very last moment to raise their hands and object to a proposal when unanimous voting was required, whereas if qualified majority voting was the rule, then they tended to engage and negotiate from a much earlier stage."

[quote:fl22c8h7]Lisbon would also have provided more parliamentary scrutiny over security legislation passed by the council. It would have extended the right of co-decision to the European Parliament for security and justice legislation and given national parliaments a "red card" to block proposals, according to Mr Kerchove. "One additional benefit is in the field of human rights and liberty with the charter of fundamental right and the scrutiny of the European Court of Justice."

He said losing Lisbon would dilute the ability of the EU to fight terrorism and organised crime, two issues cited by citizens as priorities for the EU.

[/quote:fl22c8h7]

ooh, I'm shaking in my boots- go away evil terrorists

[Clanrickard]

What precise measues does the EU want to introduce and how does the defeat of Lisbon prevent them from doing so?

Thats super secret TradCat. As our main anti-terror man says which shows his true colours:
"
He said the big problem under the EU was that security decisions had to be taken on the basis of unanimous voting at the Council of Ministers. Reaching consensus with the 27 states is not exactly a "piece of cake", said Mr Kerchove, who noted that most national parliaments do not pass legislation on the basis of 100 per cent support."

So yeah, well done fools who voted no, now it is still hard to pass very important legislation regarding terrorism. Like, it should be easy for our main man, he knows better then we do, so shut up shut up shut up

So you can't answer Tradcat's question can you? You need good co-operation between law enforcement agencies. That doesn't mean you need to be joined closer politically. It may mean some of our freedoms eroded. Remember the germans tried to make holocaust denial an EU wide crime. Telling jokes about women in France could land you in court for incitement to hatred and with the new EU prosecuter you could end up in court over there even if you live here. Continental countires tend to have top don government. The state is the guarantor of liberty and freedom and so takes steps to ensure this by , for example, mandating the carrying of id cards. I don't trust people with such a cultural backround not to introduce the idea here.