The EU thread

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

But seriously, what props up your system? I can't imagine there's much in the way of pro landfill NIMBYism? Can I blame lawyers cashing in on the system? In my totally unbiased and logical view, it's usually lawyers fault 

To add to what Sheilbh said, it's another case of the problem I mentioned earlier in the thread with the EU as a whole.  It's a classic case of "everybody agrees there's a problem, but nobody can agree on the solution".  Nobody wants a decommissioned landfill sitting there, but every proposal to do something with it is loudly opposed by someone, so it just sticks there in limbo.  This happens all the time in many places in the US, too.

[HVC]

Fair enough sheilbh. Victorians look down upon you with disdain, though.


*edit* good point baron.

*edit 2* although, to Baron's point is it that bad across Europe and we just hear about it more from England because of language and poster bias, or is it a uniquely British disease?

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

The EU comment I was referring to was what I said on the subject of the EU trying to come up with a coherent solution to the Union's problems.  It wasn't about other EU countries having this specific problem internally.

[Sheilbh]

*edit 2* although, to Baron's point is it that bad across Europe and we just hear about it more from England because of language and poster bias, or is it a uniquely British disease?

I think a bit of all three

I've seen some German politicians make similar points and also some similar criticisms from, I think, the Netherlands.

But I think it's more extreme here. And a lot of this comes from European law and I think (and I think this has generally been an issue in our interaction with European laws) we have a particular issue with that in two ways. I think the way our system of interpretation and precedent works, interacts unhelpfully with principles based European law. We are also, in general, more litigious (not as bad as Americans but more of an issue than most Europeans - with some exceptions like some claims covered by insurance in Germany).

It is also a bee in my bonnet.

[Valmy]

Fair enough sheilbh. Victorians look down upon you with disdain, though.


*edit* good point baron.

*edit 2* although, to Baron's point is it that bad across Europe and we just hear about it more from England because of language and poster bias, or is it a uniquely British disease?

This particular problem seems uniquely British. The Euros, for all their faults, can build shit. To the point I am envious as a Texan and we supposedly have lax regulations. When we try to build something it turns into a total clusterfuck, totally over budget and late and turns into a statewide embarrasment. When France or the Netherlands or whatever builds something it actually gets built. I don't get it.

But I think this is just a reference to the general problem of trying to solve anything. Intertia is really powerful.

[HVC]

The EU comment I was referring to was what I said on the subject of the EU trying to come up with a coherent solution to the Union's problems.  It wasn't about other EU countries having this specific problem internally.

Gotcha, but i did make me curious if the same disease lead to the same symptoms in other countries.

[Jacob]

EU now has its own 'secure and encrypted' satellite communication system, Kubilius says

Eight satellites from five different member states are currently being pooled as part of GOVSATCOM. The Commission hopes this is the first step towards less dependence on the US - whose own communication systems are a lot more mature.

European Union member states now have access to European-made "secure and encrypted" satellite communication, the bloc's Commissioner for Defence and Space announced on Tuesday.

"Last week we started GOVSATCOM operations," Andrius Kubilius said from the European Space Conference on Tuesday, referring to the European Union Governmental Satellite Communications programme. "That means all member states can now have access to sovereign satellite communication. Military and government. Secure and encrypted. Built in Europe, operated in Europe, under European control."

He described it as the "first step in satellite connectivity". Expanded coverage and bandwidth set for 2027, while the operationalisation of the Infrastructure for Resilience, Interconnectivity and Security by Satellite (IRIS²), a multi-orbital constellation of 290 satellites, is now expected in 2029 instead of 2030.

These efforts are all part of plans to reduce the EU's dependence on foreign space services, such as Starlink, which is owned by Elon Musk. They also go hand-in-hand with the EU's efforts to bolster the bloc's defence capabilities and readiness before the end of the decade, a point when some intelligence agencies estimate Russia could attack another European country.

More here: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/01/27/eu-now-has-its-own-secure-and-encrypted-satellite-communication-system-kubilius-says

[Crazy_Ivan80]

Fair enough sheilbh. Victorians look down upon you with disdain, though.


*edit* good point baron.

*edit 2* although, to Baron's point is it that bad across Europe and we just hear about it more from England because of language and poster bias, or is it a uniquely British disease?

Flanders has the disease too. Large projects take forever due to regulation and lawsuits. Lawsuits often created by ngo-groups subsidized by the government (just another reason to retract subsidies from such groups)

[Syt]

This particular problem seems uniquely British. The Euros, for all their faults, can build shit. To the point I am envious as a Texan and we supposedly have lax regulations. When we try to build something it turns into a total clusterfuck, totally over budget and late and turns into a statewide embarrasment. When France or the Netherlands or whatever builds something it actually gets built. I don't get it.

But I think this is just a reference to the general problem of trying to solve anything. Intertia is really powerful.

I think it's pretty widespread. And it makes it hard to distinguish between genuine concerns (e.g. in Vienna - do we need another highway arterial through a nature preserve instead of expanding public transport infrastructure?) from the frivolous ones (windmills cause cancer), and obviously there will often be a very blurry line and vast gray area between what's reasonable and what isn't and strong divisions over it.