You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Submit your comments on this article
Austria’s secret service proposal falls flat
2004-02-23
EU Justice and Interior Ministers rejected on Thursday an ambitious proposal by Austria calling for the creation of a European Intelligence Agency to reinforce the EU’s actions against terrorism and organised crime.
Don’t want to upset anyone, do we?
The proposal, set out in a discussion paper presented by Austria’s Interior Minister Ernst Strasser to his other EU counterparts on Thursday, was to set up a European intelligence service - but without police powers - with the aim of identifying at an early stage potential threats to the EU’s security.
Intel services should never, ever have police powers, as a matter of principle. I'm not sure I even like the idea of police agencies like the FBI having their own intel services. Those are two separate functions, both of them moderately dangerous to individual liberty on their own, that have to potential to become nightmares when combined.
The paper, presented as part of the EU’s Security Strategy adopted last year, highlights the need for a coordinated approach among EU states particularly after the recent series of letter bombs targeted at EU officials. =But there was an unenthusiastic response from Mr Strasser’s colleagues. Irish Justice Minister Michael McDowell, whose country holds the EU presidency, described this document as "very interesting", but said that "there was a strong sense that before we create new agencies we have to learn to walk, before we can run".
Yes Minister, we wouldn’t want to be too brave, would we.
Germany was also sceptical about the proposal, as it felt it would duplicate work being done by the EU’s umbrella police organisation, Europol.
And you never know what else they might discover, do we?
Mr Strasser’s proposals also called for the creation of a European Security Monitor, a European Police Corps as well as having joint meetings between EU Justice and Home affairs ministers and foreign affairs ministers – which currently hold separate monthly meetings.
I suppose the good news is that they won’t have more layers of bureaucracies, doing less and less.
Posted by:tipper

#4  Ooh, the dreaded "EU bureaucracy" again. Look at me shiver.

Unlike what you may think, EU bureaucrats in Brussels aren't in the habit of leaving their offices in Brussels to visit obscure little Scottish villages and measuring people's swingsets.

I'd bet quite a bit of money that what *actually* happened, is that some *British* officials, following *British* law, found those swingsets to be violating standards that had been voted by the *British* parliament.

And then they ofcourse blamed it to the EU bureaucrats being nasty and stuff.

So, anonymous, want us to bet on the nationality of the inspectors that took down those swings? Or which country's laws they were following? Because what I read through googling for a couple minutes, is that the British parliament was the one that turned some certain non-mandatory "European Standards of Safety" into *British* law.

Oooh, lookit what I have found here:
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/printer-friendly.asp?ARTICLE_ID=30597

"While the EU directive is not law, failing to comply could leave the village council open to lawsuits if a child were injured. "

In short, this isn't about some evil EU guys taking down children's swings -- this about the EU providing some non-mandatory safety standards, accepted then by the British parliament, and leaving the town council open to lawsuits *if* a child got hurt.
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2004-2-23 12:48:35 PM  

#3  Heavens, indeed. No one has used "sinister" regards the EU to my knowledge - that's a canard to create drama - AFIK, the EU can't muster anything sinister, except perhaps a chocolate bunny with a particularly demonic look in his eyes. Europol is an EU version (read: duplication) of Interpol, which relies upon Interpol resources, heh - only it's, uh, democratic. Yup. Read and be "informed" by their promo text.

Regards the word "sinister", I would suggest that "comical" is far more accurate regards RB comments. It is best illustrated with examples. The EU bureaucracy ordered a village in Scotland to dismantle the swing in their park for its failure to meet "EU Standards" yet, at the same time, EuroStat was mired in a massive financial scandal involving almost 5M Euros where "auditors found a "total lack of an audit trail "which made it impossible to find out where the money went." Your swingset can be off by an inch in some dimension, so you must tear it down. But contracts can be issued to non-existent companies and EuroStat can run a double-accounting system (2 sets of books, one cooked) without auditing.

Now, when contrasted, that's some funny shit - and almost redefines hypocrisy. A fascinating bit is this from the same BBC story:
"Who profited? Mr Franchet, Mr Byk and Mr Nanopoulos deny any fraud, claiming that the secret bank accounts simply enabled them to pay contracts on time by bypassing lengthy EU bureaucratic procedures."

From the horses' mouths. Sinister? No. Comical and hypocritical? Indeed.
Posted by: Anonymous   2004-2-23 11:18:13 AM  

#2  Gods above! You people think it sinister when the EU gets more powers, and you think it even more sinister when it doesn't? Fine, be insane and hypocritical -- I knew you for that already after all.

And Rafael, first time you hear of Europol?
Posted by: Aris Katsaris   2004-2-23 6:13:00 AM  

#1  'Europol'?? Good grief.
Posted by: Rafael   2004-2-23 2:25:36 AM  

00:00