System failure aids another EU power-grab

charles hercock

You are obsessed by the EU.Cameron is no shrinking violet and no friend of beaurocracy here or in Brussels.Why keep stoking a non story.Or do you just want to sell more copies of the dreadful Daily Mail

Cuffleyburgers

A very good litmus test of Cameron's intentions.

I fear the worst.

Shame because up to now I have been reasonably pleased the coalition's performance.

Cuffleyburgers

@ C. Hercock - and your point is??

This is a political blog, and no political issue is more important than sovereignty and legal due process - this issue encompasses both.

Better crawl back under your stone...

Rhoda Klapp

OK, Hercock, explain why you think it's a good thing for EU police and judges to have the (effective) power of arrest here, when we have no say in it. Never mind whether YOU want the EU talked about, why is it a good thing?

JohnPage

This is a simple case of system failure.

This is charitable. How could no one at the Home Office spot this, not the civil service, not the politicians?

Chris Rose

It is a cardinal principle of our democracy that the police are accountable to our elected representatives. The EU police are not and so they should have no jurisdiction over us.

Richard Tebboth

It is good to see evidence of independent thought from the back benches.
It is depressing to see ignorance (or studied indifference) from the front bench.
The sovereignty issue will not go away with a small input of Europhilia from the LibDem coalition partners.

John

AAAAAGGGGHHHHHH

Bl**dy EU makes me so angry.

Let's have our country back.

NickW

There are many in the EU who are hell bent on continuing the EU power grab from nation states and furthering the centralisation of all power in an unelected European Government.
This creeping subversion of democracy can only be resisted by a clearly drawn line in the sand that everyone understands means business.
Is Cameron going to renege on his promise?

If he does, his support and the support for the coalition will vanish.

strapworld

JohnPage. That is because the Home Offioce, like all Ministries are controlled by left wing malcontents. They will do all they can to derail this government, or any government not formed by the Labour lot!

This is a wake up call for Cameron. They will have to place their own commissars in every department to ensure their government is kept on the correct track.

crowbait

Get it into your collective heads Cameron and his cabinet are,for the most part,Euro Loonies.What is the difference between a'cast iron guarantee and a 'triple lock'? We all know that the cast iron guarantee was made of tissue paper.So do not hold your breath waiting for the latest EU decree to be squashed by the British Government.

Rotten

Ever get the feeling you've been cheated?

callmedave

Dave will Cave!

(as always)

charles hercock

Sad to say this blog is becoming more and more like the Daily Mail with its Euro hystericism.Again Sad

John Richardson

John Page.

Yes.

We are obliged, against our better natures to say,'You are a liar', to those we would prefer to trust.
I do not like to do it. However, if we pretend not to notice when people tell us lies; then I suppose we become complicit.

Public discourse has been poisoned by the political class.
A 'mistake' or an 'oversight', perhaps a 'misjudgement' or is it 'system failure'?

No.
They are lying. Again.

In2minds

In his post 'Protecting the Coalition's vulnerable party' James Forsyth @ 11.50am gets all worried about plummeting LibDem popularity. This misses the point, the Tories WILL go down too if they keep on pulling this sort of trick. And if they are too stupid to see the EU as a really big issue then it's what they deserve.

Verity

Hercock - No, Cameron is no shrinking violet. But he is self-obssessed and rather stupid. For example, he thought all his infantile PR stunts during the two years leading up to the elections (huskies, ice floes, bike, bike "stolen" with lots of photographers on hand to photograph him looking baffled, hug a hoodie, a thought photo in the Garden of Remembrance on November 11, etc) would sway voters insread of prompting them to curl their lips in contempt.

Plus, Davey sees his future in Europe, so he is going to go along to get along.

For stupidity, self-obsession and manipulation, he is, as he stated, the heir to Blair. Anyone who believes otherwise is naive. Some dull-witted people have the knack of causing people to believe they're intelligent. Blair is another one.

Verity

The Stazi advances, with Cameron proudly marching in front.

After 4 1/2, or whatever it is, years of a vile, despised, incompetent and evil Labour government, Cameron could not win the election. Not enough people trust him to accord him a wafer thin majority. This coalition should not have been allowed.

The electorate indicated that it did not want Cameron or trust him to run the country. There should have been a moratorium, even if it meant tolerating the socialists for, say, three more months, then another GE scheduled.

Coalitions under these circumstances should not be an option. War time, yes but if your party cannot win an election outright in peace time circumstances, then you didn't win, so you're not in office.

What makes this coalition more distraceful is, Cameron wasn´t even Clegg's first choice. He was clinging onto Brown's ankles, being dragged across the carpet as Brown left No 10 for the Palace. So Cameron was twice rejected: once by the voters and once, at first, by the Lib Dems.

This man has not the slenderest mandate to be governing our country

Carroll Barry-Walsh

Given that the Home Office has been desperate for years to foist ID cards on us, has refused to comply with ECJ rulings on the retention of DNA etc, it's no wonder they would see no problems with allowing such an extension of state power over the population. We have to hope that the politicians will put a stop to this.

I was pleased that the coalition has reversed some of Labour's illiberal measures but if it just accepts the same (or worse) from the EU then it will lose my support.

Marcher Baron

The whole purpose of the EU is mission creep and ever closer union (a pity that wasn't made clear when we had a referendum back in the 70s - people like me wouldn't have been duped into thinking it was just a Common Market). The line needs to be drawn; if we don't have to sign up for it, we shouldn't. It's like the entry of new member states; we needn't have taken thousands of immigrants, but Labour signed up for it. The electorate voted for a change of government and a change of policy, not different voices singing the same tune.

Swiss Bob

Statist Authoritarian b@stards.

One day someone will give them the summary justice they are foisting upon the public.

Liz Brown

No. No and No - we must not god own the route of having the European police asking for our personal details, abilities to come over to the UK to arrest us or any such thing. Theresa May should tell Yurop to butt out of our lives and refuse to implement this. What part of "no more power to the EU does the Govt not get???????

Austin Barry

Poor old Hercock.

I suspect his humourless agitation may result from a lifetime of introducing himself.

RKing

Verity @3:50pm

"Some dull-witted people have the knack of causing people to believe they're intelligent. Blair is another one."

Like putting their own spin on reality?
Like distorting the truth?
Like blagging on like a bit of a dimwit?
Oh and there are so many more!!
Now who does this remind me of???

TrevorsDen

The Mail says - 'under the new rules it would be possible, for example, for Spanish police investigating a murder in a nightclub to demand the ID of every British citizen who flew to the country in the month the offence took place.'

Would we want to stand in the way of the Spanish police investigating a murder? Would they make a request if they thought it was pointless - or just to upset 'Verity'?

Doesn't this sort of thing happen now anyway? I do not like the EU, would be happy to see us out of it but even without the EU we can have arrangements like this and it sounds as if we can opt out if we want anyway.
But really when we see ignorant comments like 'stazi' being brandished around we see what a bigotry of an argument we are dealing with.

Rhoda Klapp

TrevorsDen. It is best when contemplating giving new powers to authority to imagine what is the worst thing that might be done with those powers, were some new government or authority to take power. That's a thing Tony Blair never did when eroding our liberties during the last unpleasantness. What is planned here is that foreign judges and police subject to no accountabilty be allowed to intervene in the UK by right, as opposed to by request. Why in all bloody hell can you not see that such a thing is wrong? Or is it because Verity is against, or liker Hercock, it is in the Mail and must therefore be an overblown panic response to an 'adjustment, a mere tidying up exercise'. Tell us how the current arrangements of request, extraditions etc are so inadequate.

AndyLeeds

This ought to be rejected out of hand. It is a question of Soverenity and of accountability. If they want this information they should apply for it and it should be challengable in a count under English Law. All a question of Liberty.

Verity's Casita

Trevor's Den - The Stazi is when the police operate without the consent of the citizenry. You may remember E Berlin, for example.

Boudicca

We should not be allowing foreign police any jurisdiction in the UK.

I am sick to death of the EU and the servile attitude of our politicians. This is OUR country, not theirs. Everyone who wants a Referendum should join UKIP and vote UKIP in any and every election. We have got to get the message through to Cameron that if he doesn't halt the EU's interference in our country he will be an ex-Prime Minister.

denis cooper

Trevorsden, as I understand it would no longer be a "request".

I may make a "request" to you, and you may oblige me or you may refuse my request.

On the other hand, if I issue an "order" then you no longer have the power to refuse.

The change from a "request" to an "order" has clearly deprived you of power which you previously possessed.

Of course being slippery customers the government may argue that even though the power of refusal would be removed FROM the UK authorities, and at the instigation of the EU, that wouldn't actually represent a transfer of power TO the EU, but instead to the authorities of the other EU member states.

However that would be a false argument, because the power of enforcement would also be removed FROM the UK authorities, and that would presumably be transferred TO the EU institutions.

At present a senior UK police officer or ultimately the UK government can tell the UK police to co-operate fully with foreign authorities by carrying out investigations, allowing foreign police to take part in investigations, providing whatever information is requested, etc, or alternatively the UK authorities can tell the UK police to limit the extent of their co-operation or not to co-operate at all.

But under the new arrangements presumably it would be EU instititutions, first the Commission and then the Court of Justice, which would have the final word on how the UK police must respond to a European Investigation Order.

I find it incomprehensible that you, and also Charles Hercock, can be so casual about this proposal.

TrevorsDen

Dear Verity - if you want to be taken seriously instead of as a nut-job do not talk about Cameron walking at the head of the Stazi. That hysterical bollocks.

Strapworld is right about the civil service - they regularly gold plate EU regs to give themselves more power.

Can people explain to me why hoards of foreign police who have their own criminals and rioters and crowd disasters to look after should be wishing to come over to 'spy' on unsuspecting poor little Brits?
We co-operate already with overseas police and I presume these regulations would (if our police had the time and money) be able to go over to the Costa Brava to interview our criminals languishing over there. I would expect (and here I am happy to confess to a certain naivety) all police of whatever nationality to be subject to proper oversight and be expected to behave within the bounds of prima-face jurisprudence.

I am quite happy to see our political union with the EU brought to an end.
If asked I would vote for that. I am happy with that because it in no way means that we cannot pick up on all the EU regulations that we think would suit us and totally would not stop us signing up to all the treaties that make sense. Co-operation is fine and legal/police co-operation is part of that.

Clearly we do not need the paraphernalia of a half-assed parliament.

TrevorsDen

PS
I read that requests can be turned down if they "breach human rights laws".

No problem then.

PPS
I agree they should go before Parliament. And if Parliament votes NO, well then fine.

Verity's Cats' Litter Tray

Trevor's Den - Re your first para above, you need to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.

True Bred Pomponian

Can people explain to me why hoards of foreign police who have their own criminals and rioters and crowd disasters to look after should be wishing to come over to 'spy' on unsuspecting poor little Brits?
-------------
Because they can.

RKing

Will this also mean that OUR police can prosecute EU doctors who come cover here and kill british patients through incompetence and then go back home and get let off?

Naomi Muse

What was meant to be a total block on new edicts from the EU has turned out to be nothing of the sort.

The coalition needs to be asked how the City is going to function properly and well when its regulation will be totally with H v Rumpoy from January 2011? That will trigger a double dip recession straight away and I have heard that more than HSBC moving to the Far East, there are other banks moving their centre and head offices out of EU jurisdiction.

As far as all other EU amendments are concerned Cameron needs to explain why he is allowing these things through when he said he would not do so.

denis cooper

TrevorsDen @ 9:03 pm -

"I am quite happy to see our political union with the EU brought to an end. If asked I would vote for that."

Frankly I find that very hard to believe. Anybody can say it, of course, just as Blair once claimed that he was a "eurosceptic" - indeed that "We're all eurosceptics now".

TrevorsDen @ 9:12 pm -

""PS
I read that requests can be turned down if they "breach human rights laws".

No problem then."

Try reading this instead, from the document linked in the article:

http://www.fairtrials.net/images/uploads/European-Investigation-Order.pdf

Page 3:

"2.4 We have specific concerns about the EIO proposal (See Section 6) including:

The lack of express refusal grounds in key areas, such as

�� breach of fundamental rights

�� proportionality (the offence is trivial and/or the request would involve disproportionate use of resources or unnecessary infringement of privacy or other fundamental rights)

�� double jeopardy (the person being investigated has already been tried for the same offence)

�� territoriality (the alleged offence was not committed in the issuing but in the executing State)

The absence of a dual criminality requirement, meaning one State could be required to investigate conduct it does not itself treat as criminal

The lack of protection for individuals in custody who are transferred to other States for questioning

The absence of necessary safeguards relating to evidence given via telephone and videoconferencing

The absence of provisions enabling the defence to request an EIO to be issued where necessary in the interests of justice."

I assume you understand what is meant by a "lack of express refusal grounds"; it means, just as one example, that there is no provision for requests to be turned down if they "breach human rights laws".

Tim Carpenter LPUK

It should always remain a request backed by evidence and the granted by a judge.

Anything less will be loss of Sovereignty, Sovereignty, mind, that is only ON LOAN to the State, not given to do with it what it will.

lo ma sek to

After his remarks bout Turkey joining the EU it is clear that Dave will not last much longer.
He is just another Bliar anyway.
Perhaps we can soon have government by the people and for the people instead of by the rich and for the rich as we have now.

Minnie Ovens

charles hercock
July 26th, 2010 2:11pm

Laddie, it's will a story until the opt out is used by May.
If the opt out isn't activated then you have just spouted a load of old garbage.
I really hope this is not the case.
To another point. There are many who talk down both The Sun and The Mail.
I'm uncertain whether this is because of page 3 or because, in the Mail's case, it is all about celebrities. Fair enough.
But before anyone does this again it might be well worth remembering that 90% of these papers may be dross but about 10% is normally well selected news stories on political matters which are not screaming left or right wing biased shrieks but somewhat thoughtful pieces aimed at the British middle class.
Oh, and their consumer influence and political pull, with a readership far, far beyond anything of the Guardian, Times or Telegraph, is not to be dismissed lightly.

TV Sweden

I am really surprised at the lack of research you did for this article, Fraser. Most un-Spectator like. International crime detection depends on a system of mutual legal assistance between countries. It"s been carrying on for over a hundred years in one form or another and has moved on a bit since the early 19th century when the German police sent Scotland Yard a pair of amputated hands in response to a request for fingerprints. But it is slow and inefficient with long delays, particularly affecting British police attempts to get timely evidence from elsewhere in Europe. This new system will be more efficient and quick. There are all sorts of safeguards in it to protect rights - a dual criminality requirement for anything coercive such as search warrants, which will continue to be subject to a judge's decision, and the defence will be able to use the same system for exculpatory evidence. It confers no new powers on Brussels, nor does it give foreign police any powers to operate here. If we choose to stay out of it, any request to any other EU country for evidence about our Costa del Crime criminals will go right to the bottom of the Spanish in tray. If the policy of the Spectator is to get Britain out of the EU then make your argument on that basis. While we are in it, making life more difficult for criminals seems quite a good idea.

Stephen Green

Sorry Chris Rose you have got your Constitutional Law wrong. The police are ultimately responsible to her Majesty the Queen and not to Parliament. Just as well when you consider the number of Parliamentary crooks who fiddled their expences.
Blair tried to alter the law but fortunately like most of New Labour's rotten schemes it came to nothing

Fraser Nelson

TV Sweden, just because we disagree it doesn't mean I didn't do research! I have no doubt that the intentions of the EIU are those which you outline. But I'm primarily concerned with the unintended consequences, and the potential burden they will place on an EU immigrants than any other. The link to the Fair Trials International document neatly sums up my concerns.