So, how are you defining 'Safer' Stronger In?

 It's quite difficult, on the face of it, to see how taking the external doors off your house is likely to make you and your family safer or better protected but this seems to be the claim of the remains.

It is true that we are not part of the EU's Schengen Agreement which means no border controls within the EU area but we are signed up to the free movement of people which means we cannot stop EU citizens from coming to the UK to live, work use the Health Service, our education system, claim benefits etc. - even if they have a criminal record and are unskilled.

The Remains say that we do control our borders because we're not part of Schengen - if that is the case, why is net immigration to the UK still at the level of several hundred thousand a year rather than the tens of thousands that was the stated target in the government's most recent election manifesto? It is simply not a claim that stands up to any kind of scrutiny.

 So safer then? In France half of that country's armed forces are now being deployed on the streets because of the threat of terrorism - a threat which has come about because the EU cannot control its own external borders, particularly with the Middle East and Turkey from where millions of illegal migrants are swarming into Greece, Italy, Spain etc.

Among these illegals there are also some refugees, but although there are perfectly acceptable laws already in place to differentiate the two very different statuses, it has now become impossible to differentiate them because of the lack of border control and it seems as if the EU is about to dismiss the Dublin agreement on refugees which states that refugees must seek refuge in the first safe country they come to. This will have massive rammifications for the whole of Europe and will mean that the influx will continue unabated. Indeed it is causing conflict between member states already with the erection of walls on border crossings designed to stop the influx, and a rise in conflict and rhetoric between a number of European countries.

And just as there are refugees mixed in with the illegal migrants, there are also terrorists. That's not speculation but a known and proven fact. There are now terrorist cells in every European country including the UK as a direct result of the EU's weak response to the migrant crisis, and one of the main clusters of terrorists is in the Molenbeek area of Brussels - the erstwhile capital of the EU. Safer?

The theory is - given this background that we now have to live with and which has been largely caused by the EU - that we are safer because we (EU countries) share intelligence and work together against terrosism. But this is far from the actualité. We have seen the keystone cops in Belgium, sending dozens of heavily armed special forces personnel to arrest three terrorists in a flat in Molenbeek - two of whom escaped. The lack of cooperation between intelligence agencies, hampered by different languages and a reluctance to share information, is actually helping not hindering the terrorists.

The quality of intelligence is sketchy at best and is certainly nowhere near as good as we enjoy (if that is the right word) in the UK, where we are, as part of the 'Five Eyes' network, along with the US, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, part of the world's best and most effective anti-terrorist network, which has nothing to do with the EU.

And these migrants, whose behaviour is now causing Germany and Sweden in particular to change their long established way of life, with gender segregated trains and advice to women not to go out alone at night in cities or wear anything that might be construed as provocative, are being allowed to settle in Europe (despite being illegals). They will gain citizenship in due course and will then be able to come to the UK unhindered. If we remain in the EU.

How does this make us safer? How does the bahaviour and attitudes of these migrants - anti-gay, anti alcohol, anti women - make us either safer or freer in our own communities?

One of the original purposes of the EU was to create a peaceful European Community based on trade and trust, that would stop smaller countries being bullied by larger ones and would tie Germany into a European 'family' following on from the two unpleasantnesses of the last century. This objective has singularly failed: Germany now dominates the EU and EU policies have directly led to unemployment on a massive scale in southern Europe which has, in turn, led to a rise in extremism, a growth of extremist parties and civil unrest on the streets.

It has also created a situation in Spain, Italy, Portugal and Greece in particular where young people have very little prospect of employment, careers or a prosperous future. That is hardly likely to make us all safer.

Perhaps the Stronger In people have some different and novel definition of the term 'safer'? One which does actually mean that relying on an intelligence system that is obviously not fit for purpose and which sees our having no control over the numbers coming in to the UK, is a safer option for the UK than controlling our own borders and relying on our own world-class security services rather than the keystone cops?

If so I'm all ears.

Thanks for reading.

How are you defining 'Better Off' Stronger IN?

How are you defining 'Stronger' Stronger In?