Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
THE BANE OF many travellers’ lives is roaming charges – but thankfully the EU has started taking steps in recent years to lower the cost of using your mobile phone while abroad in Europe.
However, the Brexit referendum has left some people wondering what’s going to happen to roaming charges when the UK leaves the EU.
Today, MEP Deirdre Clune said that the “huge uncertainty” over Brexit and what it will mean for consumers extends to roaming.
“Roaming charges are due to be abolished across Europe next year, 2017, and that’s being seen as good for the consumer, good for travellers, good for tourism and another positive sign of how Europe has worked to ensure there are no barriers across Europe,” she said.
But she asked: “If the UK exits Europe as they decided to do, what will that mean for Irish travellers travelling to the UK or across to Europe? Will they have higher charges – will they have to pay higher charges for roaming?”
Answering her own question, Clune said that it is “likely” to mean higher charges, given “that the UK will be outside Europe and the companies there will be free to do what they like; they are not subject to EU rules or EU regulation”.
It will be difficult for consumers. It will be expensive, and it will also mean UK people travelling to Ireland as tourists, it will be a disadvantage for them.
The MEP said that this uncertainty over charges could also apply to other consumer issues once the UK has left Europe.
So far, the UK hasn’t made any concrete promises about what will happen with roaming charges. Once outside of the EU, companies won’t be subject to regulation – but that doesn’t mean they will necessarily want to impose higher roaming charges either.
As with most of the post-Brexit outcomes, the situation is far from clear.
As for the attitude amongst her fellow MEPs toward Bexit, Clune said: “At the beginning there was shock… now people want certainty, want article 50 triggered as soon as possible.”
She said that once the UK has its new prime minister settled in, it is time to trigger the article that will enable it to leave the EU.
The process needs to get underway to “eliminate a lot of the uncertainty that is there”, said Clune.
Apparently this guy had been watched 24/7 since 2016. They spent all this time, money and resources on a guy who wasn’t even a New Zealander and this still happens. Why wasn’t he just deported?
@Colleen: Because you can’t arrest people for crimes they are yet to commit.
@Niamh Hayes: you can if you can prove conspiracy
@Michael Burke: They obviously couldn’t prove conspiracy then.
@Colleen: he would face “torture and violence” if he was deported, his lawyers said
@Niamh Hayes: yes you can.. I saw it on a documentary called “minority report”
@Niamh Hayes: look up the difference between deported and arrested.
@Colleen: NZ has a varefullg-crafted superiority complex to consider.
@Niamh Hayes:
You’re right but he was arrested previously for planning an attack but it was ruled by a judge that planning an attack is not illegal. Maybe it should be.
@Paul O Connor: that’s outrageous if true. Planning mass murder isn’t a crime?
@Niamh Hayes: crazy law
If he was known to be a violent extremist since 2016 why wasn’t he deported.
@Philip Kedney: because they are too soft. Now they are paying the price.
@Philip Kedney: because of barbaric principles like “innocent until proven guilty”?
Its only a matter of time before something like this happens in Dublin, plenty of extremists here under investigation; Sure didn’t one of the attackers in England have an Irish ID card a few years back and a Dublin address
@David Lee: got married in Ireland ya. Was staying out in Santry for a bit too, you are correct. Ireland, albeit an enemy to the Islamic State, is less likely to be attacked due to our strategic benefit to IS. Our security is incredibly lax and we share an unmanned border with the UK who would be a much bigger target in their eyes. They use Ireland as a gateway and therefore would not like to draw attention or give cause for increased security and scrutiny to their activities in Ireland by launching an attack here. Of course that is a large co-ordinated attack. We would very much be at risk from the lone wolf nut-jobs alright who are inspired by IS twisted ideology.
in ireland he would have got a good slap on the hand and a strongly worded letter
Was wondering how far down the page we’d make it before the obligatory inane ‘comparison’ comment.
Terrible thing to happen. Please God, all the victims will make a full recovery.
Great to see we have so many security and anti-terrorism experts, all putting their skills to their best use writing comments on thejournal.ie.
So they lied when they originally said it was “random”? Or are they just that incompetent?
@Thomas Smyth: It’s sounding as if he was copying IS attacks but not in a cell of terrorists conspiring to plan an attack? It’s that odd difference again between a gang with a religious or political motive and a wanna be serial killer, I suppose.
Unclear at this point whether or not suspect was NZ citizen / if he was might help explain why he wasn’t deported.
What was a Sri Lankan doing in NZ for 10 years? Was he legally resident,with status? Why wasnt he deported for his known extremist views?
‘Under surveillance’ resulting what the authorities suspected would happen is laughable. Same with the London Bridge attack…..’under surveillance’ before the guy had even left prison.
Going after New Zealand no country is safe from terrorism.
@andrew: no country is safe from a lunatic. ‘Terrorism’ is a handy tag.
@Alan McArdle: Some countries are more susceptible than others particularly in the era were living in.
have your say