They have been pushing that red herring from the start. Nothing new.
"unless security co-operation with the EU is maintained" so there you have it. No issue unless the EU decides to be uncooperative and help the bad guys; which one trusts isn't an attitude likely from folk able to achieve high office.
It is a crap headline, and certainly is not borne out by the story underneath it.
The Lords are saying what everyone seems to agree. That we shouldn't let Brexit harm our ability to catch terrorists and criminals. They are not saying Brexit will harm security, they are saying it could if we get rid of the current cooperation which is working.
Seems to me that all this "Project Fear" mockery is because people insist on ignoring the difference between a warning about what *could* go wrong, and a prediction about what *will* go wrong. It stands to reason that Brexit could go horribly wrong if we aren't careful, where here "wrong" covers a whole range of outcomes. On the other hand, being aware of the risks allows us to avoid them.
Yet more proof that we can't just say 'That's all folks' and simply walk out, as you keep on advocating !! Yet another subject that has to be negotiated during the leaving process.
To bring up "coulds" is simply to push anti Brexit views in the hope of causing issues. It is blatantly obvious that not every agreement we have with the EU should be binned on exiting the controlling club.
Of course we could just leave. The EU elites would need to be insane to deliberately cause problems for all after such an event. And I don't think multinational chaos is their aim. It's control/power.