As we worry about the budget and odd ideas that the UK Government can somehow exempt UK small businesses from new regulations for three years(ECJ anyone?) I note that this event is happening.
The bumpf that acconmpanies this event at least accepts that for now Intelligence remains a national competence,
National security remains the sole responsibility of each Member State, as the Lisbon Treaty clearly defines.But, it goes on, but,
At the same time the Stockholm Programme calls for very specific issues to be dealt with, in particular the division of tasks between the Union and the MS, solidarity between MS, reflection of a proactive and intelligence-led approach, stringent cooperation between the Union agencies, including further improving their information exchange, a focus on implementation and streamlining as well as on improvement of preventive action and last but not least at all: the aim of making citizens aware of the importance of the Union’s work to protect them.Apart from the fact that I have no wish for the EU to work to protect me thank you very much this is deeply worying. More so when we look further. These high faluting chaps like Ferenc BÁNFI, the boss of the European Police College, who trained and served as a Communist era policemen, who has an extremely bizarre website, and is committed to the creation of an EU FBI, seem to be pointing a different direction.
Can Europe afford having fragmented intelligence presence across the globe in a world of rising global threats and global competition? Is it realistic to start thinking about the foundations of a future common EU intelligence?I would have thought that we can co-operate of course but there is no need to amalgamate.
One thing is very interesting is its terminology is this statement,
What are the key aspects of building trusted relationships between the symbolic authorities of national sovereignty in the European Union?Not real authorities, but symbolic.