EU needs Britain but Britain needs independence more

By June 19, 2018February 18th, 2021No Comments



EU would rather risk lives than do a deal, as Barnier puts ‘guillotine clause’ on security deal

Yesterday in Brussels the EU’s Chief Negotiator Michel Barnier yet again imposed new conditions on a post-Brexit Britain.

This time the subject was security. You can read on for our summary and analysis.



UK wants ‘deep & special partnership’ with EU

EU wants to treat UK like any other country in the world

“Non-member cannot have the same benefits as a member”

Co-operation will be limited

“No access to Europol Information System”

Co-operation axed if UK not party to European Convention on Human Rights

UK must adhere to EU data protection rules

These days the EU often issues its documents in the form of ‘slides’. In practice these are documents in note form. The document issued by Barnier yesterday was entitled “Police and judicial cooperation in criminal matters”.


This document outlines the UK’s position for continuing police and judicial co-operation post-Brexit and gives the EU’s response in broad terms. It deals with exchange of security information (highly relevant to terrorism), international crime, and extradition of wanted persons.

In the document the EU makes clear that the UK must meet certain demands if the limited co-operation on offer is to be allowed.

The UK must remain party to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)

“Guillotine clause”, if UK repudiates Convention or is condemned by European Court of Human Rights

UK data protection standards must be assessed as conforming to EU standards

“Guillotine clause” if adequacy decision withdrawn or declared invalid by European Court of Justice (ECJ)

ECJ to be arbiter

The key takeaway from this document is the repeatedly ignored statement from the EU that the repeated desire of Theresa May for a “Deep and Special Partnership” with the EU is not shared by the EUrocracy.

In one section of the document on policing and security this is summed up as follows:

Theresa May’s “Deep and Special Partnership” becomes a “Shared Understanding” for the EU.


This is a high-level document from the EU so there is no point going into details about police, security and judicial co-operation with the EU post-Brexit.

The key point is what this document says about the overall approach of the British government to the negotiations with the EU.

Theresa May wants a “Deep and Special Partnership” and the EU merely offers a “Shared Understanding”.

Theresa May expects a special relationship, whereas the EU insists that a “non-member cannot have the same benefits as a member”. The UK is to be treated like a ‘third country’ – like any other non-EU country in the world.

This is despite decades of subsidizing the EU, and decades of keeping the EU27 countries safe by being one of the very few countries meeting its defence commitments.


From the outset we said that these negotiations would be all about politics. The UK is not negotiating with the peoples of the EU27 countries, but with its extreme unelected rulers in Brussels.

Any experienced negotiator worth his salt will tell you that it’s essential to understand the mindset of the opposing party in a negotiation. In the case of the EU, we’re dealing with ideologues. Whatever may be rational and good for the citizens of the EU27 – as well as the UK – simply doesn’t come into it. The EU ‘Projekt’ is everything.


Let’s look at one example. One of the first things Theresa May did was to tell the EU that she was ready and willing to lay to rest the question of the rights of citizens to stay in the UK – and the rights of UK citizens to stay in the EU.

Instead, the EU refused to discuss it. This was a cynical decision which has affected the lives of almost 4 million EU27 citizens in the UK, to say nothing of the 900,000 British citizens in the EU.

It took until June last year (2017) before the EU were willing to discuss this, and they made it one of their three priority items before they would discuss trade and the ongoing relationship. They presented this as if they were putting citizens first. Had this been their real intention they would have agreed this issue back in late 2016 when the UK proposed it.


Please ask yourself this:

Q: What kind of people put their political ideology above the citizens whose lives it is their duty to protect?

A: Unelected EU bureacrats and elitist political leaders with agendas.


The EU is not what you want it to be. It is what it is. And it isn’t pretty.

To the duffers in the House of Lords yesterday who voted against independence: history will see you as the traitors you are.

[Sources: EU Commission] 05.50am, 19 June 2018


Name: Patrick H, London Date/Time: 19 June 2018, 12.03pm

Message: “DEEP & SPECIAL PARTNERSHIP” don’t make me laugh! WHEN WILL THE ESTABLISHMENT WAKE UP? A better question would be: why are our UK Establishment so hell-bent on overturning Brexit? Answer: Our UK Establishment “is” the EU! Brexit is fighting on two fronts – Brussels and Wasteminister. Let’s cut to the chase. The final analysis is: until T May is gone, along with her miserable, nefarious, anti-democratic, anti-British cohorts; and the anti-democratic toadies in the Lords are replaced with real Brexiteers, this insidious charade will continue! The 17.4 million voters are not blind to these disgraceful shenanigans and are simply holding fire until it has become patently clear the electorate have been betrayed.

Name: Not4EU, London Date/Time: 19 June 2018, 10.01am

Message: Before the EU decided that it needed its own Europol to control policing in its developing ‘country’, police co-operation between 192 countries was, & still is, managed through Interpol. Indeed the ‘EU’ is also a ‘member’ of this organisation:

Why don’t we just co-operate through this body?

When is the Govt going to realise that the EU is not our ‘friend’ and that they have no intention of reaching any ‘deal’? Their intentions are writ large in slide 10 – “There is no presumption of mutual trust outside of the EU institutional framework underpinned by common principles. Risk for integrity and good functionning (sic) of Schengen (cf. asymmetry of rights and obligations, ECJ case law on coherence of Schengen acquis)”

We had an opt-out on this competence until May gave it away to the EU. It seems to me that the demise of our police & judiciary, in failing to apply the law without fear or favour, emerging parallel legal systems & its politicisation seemed to accelerate when May handed this ‘competence’ to the EU.

Walk away. Just leave. No transition. No money. WTO rules. They can then seek a ‘deal’ after we’ve properly left. The EU itself says that no deal can be agreed until we’ve left. There is still a strong possibility of the ‘no deal’ scenario, so all companies doing business with EU27 countries will have a contingency plan for this event. ‘Non-preparedness’ is not an issue.

Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex Date/Time: 19 June 2018, 08.53am

Message: “Deep and special partnership” was never going to happen.The EU is a totalitarian organization: you are either in or out. The EU knows that the UK will prosper outside their bloc, that’s why they want to impose restrictions on us. The EU wants to have a standard corporation tax rate across the 27 countries, and the ability to obtain tax raising powers. Having an advanced consumer economy, with an educated workforce and the freedom and flexibility to alter tax rates to competitive rates, on their doorstep would prevent this. The EU is beset with problems of their own making. All across the EU voters and their governments are questioning EU Commission decisions. The unilateral invitation by Angela Merkel to African and Middle Eastern economic immigrants to come to Germany, and her subsequent demand other EU countries take their share was the game-changer. The rise in serious crime, rape and murder, these immigrants have brought with them have totally destroyed the orderly life many in Europe enjoyed. So it is no surprise people have rejected this immigration policy and are questioning the direction the EU is taking them in. Crack-downs on free speech and the internet, and calls for “more Europe, more integration” and the loss of national identity, are causing alarm amongst many voters.