Leaving EU Galileo is not fully accessible anymore being a EU project.
In March 2018, the European Commission announced that the United Kingdom may be excluded from parts of Galileo (especially relating to the secured service PRS) following its exit from the European Union (EU). As a result, Airbus plans to relocate work on the Ground Control Segment (GCS) from its Portsmouth premises to an EU state.
British officials have been reported to be seeking legal advice on whether they can reclaim the ā¬1.4 billion invested by the United Kingdom, of the ā¬10 billion spent to date. In a speech at the EU Institute for Security Studies conference, the EU Chief Negotiator in charge of the Brexit negotiations, Michel Barnier, stressed the EU position that the UK had decided to leave the EU and thus all EU programmes, including Galileo.
In August 2018, it was reported the UK will look to create a competing satellite navigation system to Galileo post-Brexit.
In December 2018, British Prime Minister Theresa May announced that the UK would no longer seek to reclaim the investment, and Science Minister Sam Gyimah resigned over the matter.
Thatās really petty of the EU if the UK put in the initial investment. The EU needs to stop being butt hurt about it, it proves the point of the brexit crowd.
Or the UK govt can quit their whinging and cooperate on other matters. I think the government there feels entitled to all the benefits of the EU and none of the costs.
Even as a UK citizen, I donāt see it as petty. The UK government decided to (bumblingly) leave the EU. This is an EU project. Even if the UK put in part of the initial investment, itās unrealistic to expect all the benefits of being in the EU without any of the drawbacks. Maybe the EU can drop half of a satellite on Downing Street or something.
how many geostationary satellites can you have at a time? I thought there is a limited number of slots right?
So if every country has their own GPS system then at some point they are going to run out of slots. Then you have other satellites that need to be geostationary like communication and stuff.
The project seems to have been started in the late 1990s and went live in 2016 (according to Wikipedia), and the whole Brexit thing started in 2016. I feel like if the UK wanted continued access or a partial refund, this is one of the many things they should have negotiated in the subsequent couple of years rather than pushing it through irrespective of the consequences. They didnāt, and so here we areā¦
the uk chose to leave on their own will with all the consequences. the bad are more obvious than the potential good.
why should the eu give the uk any slack?
itās not like the uk has been treated unfair or been neglected while in the eu. in fact, the uk had always been granted special treatment. less contributions, less eu policies.
if you donāt want access to the eu, thatās fine. but donāt cry afterwards when things actually change.
In this particular case, I donāt think itās fair to lock them out of something they invested into from the start. Itās not special treatment to think you should benefit in something you invested into.
Non EU states have also contributed and given different levels of access to Galileo. Switzerland and Norway have access to secured service PRS if Iām not mistaken. I think if you put up 14% of the money, thatās enough to have the benefits of it at this point. Itās not like the UK is an enemy to the EU. 1.4 Trillion is a lot.
You do if you put up 14% of the investment to the project. You would likely own 14% unless agreed to otherwise. This isnāt a private enterprise, but if you went with this reasoning, they do have a say. The EU should buy them out if this is the way we want to look at it.
switzerland and norway are not part of the eu but abide to certain rules which both parties have agreed to and therefore theyāre eligible to participate. itās an ever ongoing negotiation but itās not at all the situation the uk put itself in.
I think this is fair. 10% and send them on their way. I donāt think itās fair to just lock them out of a project they put up 1.4 trillion into. I think they are one of the largest contributors to the project. My understanding is the UK also contributed with technology as well. So itās not all just financial.
Edit: I got it wrong, it was 1.4 billion. Not as nearly as ridiculous as 1.4 trillion. But still the same logic applies. And the UK isnāt an enemy, itās not like itās some risk to have them use the military signal they have been using since it was launched.
What is the point? The UK invested money and technology into the system. They should benefit from it like other countries like Switzerland and Norway which invested far less than the UK.
