8 ms·

Politicians call for UK security services to be given greater monitoring powers

180 points by RobAley 13y ago

UVB-76 13y ago
There's something particularly vile about the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby being exploited to advance this legislation.
- andyhmltn 13y ago
  Sadly this seems to happen a lot. Playing on the emotions of the voters is the quick and dirty way to pass something.
  - stfu 13y ago
    There is something about the political opportune moment. These are to a certain degree even predictable. For example currently it looks like we are building up the infrastructure for pushing through gun legislation. All we are waiting for is another Caucasian kid to nuts with a gun.
- alan_cx 13y ago
  Just a small version of what what happened after 9/11, no? 9/11 was used as an excuse for two invasions, and the loss of many human rights and freedoms. While I agree that it is indeed vile to use this soldier's death as an excuse, its sadly normal. And in this case, they picked a good target to use. The family are unlikely to oppose the government their lad loyally served. I would like to be wrong about that.
- Ntrails 13y ago
  When something happens that demonstrates a behaviour that is abhorrent, I expect police and the government to collaborate and prevent re-occurrence if such a thing is possible. Yes, post Twin Towers security was increased at airports. That was a political response to a clear flaw in procedure. To some degree it probably worked. [there were other, less sane, responses too] So yes, the events cause political will to chase a goal, the prevention of future incidents. I suspect many of the supporters of this Bill genuinely believe it to be in the best interests of the population, and that they, too, have read 1984 and don't think that it is a pleasant destination.
tehwalrus 13y ago
Typical stuff from the Labour authoritarian-brigade (Straw, Johnson), joined as usual by their Tory clones. I'm surprised to see a Lib Dem signatory, but then you can find a LD somewhere who'll sign up to anything (much like academics). The more disturbing thing is the political language in the letters, first accusing the Lib Dems of exploiting "coalition niceties," rather than standing up for person liberty and privacy, and secondly by trying to make it look like corporate interests: "We find it odd that many critics of the Bill prefer to champion the rights of corporations over democratically accountable law enforcement agencies." when in fact it's about individuals' privacy from state spying! Yes broadband companies said they didn't want to be responsible for logging all this data, but that's beside the point, really. This sort of rhetoric will chime dangerously well with the tabloid-reading public, on top of the arms race against criminals/terrorists/drug addicts/whoever the "bad guys" are today -- I'm worried it will be a politically effective tactic.
- alan_cx 13y ago
  Just to point out, you missed out "Paedophiles".
  - Torn 13y ago
    As usual, thinking of the children.
- Silhouette 13y ago
  I'm surprised to see a Lib Dem signatory So was I, until I recognised who it was. I don't understand exactly what Lord Carlile's position is or was in relation to government office and terrorism, but his publicly stated views seem to be about as authoritarian and illiberal as you could get.
anon1385 13y ago
This piece is by Allegra Stratton, somebody with well known ties to the Conservative party. She is giving this letter more weight than it is worth (none of those opposition MPs are part of the shadow cabinet, and their positions on this were already known as far as I remember) to try and put pressure on the Lib Dems to cave on this issue. Not that I believe Labour is going to fight this, just that this letter doesn't represent any change or "renewed pressure". John Reid, another Labour former Home Secretary, was already making a disgusting spectacle of himself all over the news in the days after Lee Rigby was murdered saying it showed the need for more government surveillance. Additionally, when Jack Straw comes out in support of some new Home Office policy, you have to put that into context. He should be facing public trial over deporting people to be tortured and lying about it[1][2], and the current government aimed to prevent that with their expansion of secret courts (part of the Justice and Security Act)[3], so he owes them big time. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Straw#Rendition_and_torture_allegations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Straw#Rendition_and_tortu... [2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/02/abdel-hakim-belhaj-jack-straw http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/02/abdel-hakim-b... [3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/sep/25/secret-courts-the-essential-guide http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/sep/25/secret-courts-the-...
- einhverfr 13y ago
  I also suspect that the timing works against this bill. It takes brashness (and not much sense) to propose this bill at this time. Yes, in the middle of a major international scandal, let's imitate the bad guys. That's a great idea....
  - ollysb 13y ago
    Or more worrying, they're buoyed by the relative lack of concern for increased surveillance.
  - 7952 13y ago
    Most "normal" people have probably been bored stupid by geeks getting upset over this issue in the last week. It is possible to follow a story passively in the background, and come to a conclusion about it based on faith rather than objective reasoning. However, bad things get; a lot of people will always believe that "the war will be over by, Christmas" because it is easier to just have faith and ignore the nerds. There is a problem in how hackers/geeks/techies portray themselves. You know that this kind of monitoring is bad because if you had the data you could do bad things (but you wouldn't because of ethics). But every app still expects people to hand over the same data and to trust the developer. Expecting people to know which geeks they can trust and which are creepy is a big ask.
Fuxy 13y ago
Lol they see the outrage of the American population over the snooping programs and they think... "I want a program like that too". Talk about selfish and not working in the peoples interest.
- rahoulb 13y ago
  It was originally proposed a couple of years back and dropped. Then following the murder of a soldier on the streets of London it's back on the agenda. They are probably cursing the timing of the NSA revelations.
  - LatvjuAvs 13y ago
    How convenient, to have some bloke kill people just in time to get new restrictions. NSA scandal was perfect, perfect timing, just wait and see how it will turn out ;)
- switch007 13y ago
  The current government have officially reached the "don't give a fuck" stage having destroyed this country already. There is not much they can't get away with.
- cboppert 13y ago
  "but moooooommmmmmmmmm, loook what Timmyyyy has!!!"
muyuu 13y ago
Nick Clegg just said "it's not going to happen with me in the government" - I'm dead worried now. They are going to push this very soon.
- Silhouette 13y ago
  It will be nothing but good for Nick Clegg if they do. He could threaten to break the coalition over it on a point of principle, and in doing so make amends for the tuition fees betrayal. He could put the Lib Dems back on the political map and reassert their authority for the next two years in government in a single sound-bite.
rwmj 13y ago
As one of the commenters on the BBC website points out, it's more likely this is about retrospectively legalizing what's already being done rather than anything new. After it was exposed that GCHQ "may" have been using Prism data (ie. of course they were) GCHQ employees are now open to being sued for contravening RIPA unless they can get something on the statute books pronto.
cjrp 13y ago
"The proposed Communications Data Bill does not want access to the content of our communications but does want to ensure that enough data is available in the aftermath of an attack to help investigators establish 'who, where and when' were involved in planning or supporting it." So there's a limitation in the bill which says that the proposed data can only be collected following an attack? Not that I've seen.
- alan_cx 13y ago
  Attack, or protest march?
- Silhouette 13y ago
  It's also surprising that they claim to need all these powers without a warrant if they're only going to be used after an event to try and figure out what happened. I do think it's important not to over-react to things like this and neuter the security services when they really do have legitimate grounds to investigate someone and they really are doing their jobs under a reasonable level of scrutiny and oversight. However, how often would security services really need to act so fast that they had to circumvent getting a named minister to personally sign off on their actions (and accept responsibility for them, presumably) or getting a court order for surveillance based on making a case that it was a reasonable to invade someone's privacy under the circumstances? William Hague keeps talking about how all of this spying is done under a legal framework, but I think he loses a lot of credibility making that argument as part of an administration that argues for secret courts and the like, standing next to the senior foreign representative of a nation that uses blatant legal trickery so it can detain people indefinitely without trial contrary to even its own normal legal rules. What's the point of having a legal framework if most people can't see that law in action or if you can just circumvent the framework when it's inconvenient?
GotAnyMegadeth 13y ago
What can I do, as a UK citizen, to stop this from happening?
- LatvjuAvs 13y ago
  What do you mean "citizen"? Do you have any rights?
- westicle 13y ago
  I hope you're asking this ironically.
  - GotAnyMegadeth 13y ago
    No, I meant what are the best things to do in what order.
    - Silhouette 13y ago
      Contact your MP? MPs are real people and they have few enough constituents that you can make a personal connection with them. So, in terms of effectiveness, the more effort you make the more effect it is likely to have, up to a point. If you make an appointment and visit them in person, you're obviously serious, and even if they're a loyal supporter of a party whose official policy is to promote the surveillance, they'll have to look you in the eye and tell you to go away rather than just sending a form letter by automaton-mail. If enough constituents did that to fill up a few MPs' surgery days for a month, it would probably make quite a difference. Failing that, if you take the time to write a proper letter or ring them and talk to a real person at their office, at least they know you care enough to do something substantial. If you sign some e-petition or forward them the 253rd copy of a form letter on-line, it might be better than nothing, but it doesn't demonstrate much more comitment on your part than making a "me too" post on an on-line forum, so it's probably going to carry weight (or not) accordingly. You could also donate to political groups/civil rights organisations like Liberty or the Open Rights Group, if you're willing to put actual money on the line to help fund lobbying against these kinds of measures.
- 13y ago
mikeratcliffe 13y ago
I find that peoples understanding of this issue is way too simplistic. It won't help to stop terrorists because they will always use the internet in ways that cannot be monitored (https, VPN, etc.). It will allow the gathering of everybodies data in one place, which is dangerous as hackers are regularly gaining access to this kind of information. Another problem is that innocent people are sure to be branded as possible terrorists and refused entry on flights etc.
- gaius 13y ago
  Worth reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002 In an exercise, an enemy using a method not easy to intercept sunk the US Navy. Oops.
mindcrime 13y ago
Great, more government surveillance, that's exactly what we need. Maybe the Brits could just copy the language of the "Patriot Act" outright and implement that.
Yaa101 13y ago
They will just use it to fine more people for misplacing their trashcans, like they did with all their security programs.

180 points by RobAley 13y ago

UVB-76 13y ago

There's something particularly vile about the murder of Drummer Lee Rigby being exploited to advance this legislation.

andyhmltn 13y ago
Sadly this seems to happen a lot. Playing on the emotions of the voters is the quick and dirty way to pass something.
- stfu 13y ago
  There is something about the political opportune moment. These are to a certain degree even predictable. For example currently it looks like we are building up the infrastructure for pushing through gun legislation. All we are waiting for is another Caucasian kid to nuts with a gun.
alan_cx 13y ago
Just a small version of what what happened after 9/11, no? 9/11 was used as an excuse for two invasions, and the loss of many human rights and freedoms. While I agree that it is indeed vile to use this soldier's death as an excuse, its sadly normal. And in this case, they picked a good target to use. The family are unlikely to oppose the government their lad loyally served. I would like to be wrong about that.
Ntrails 13y ago
When something happens that demonstrates a behaviour that is abhorrent, I expect police and the government to collaborate and prevent re-occurrence if such a thing is possible. Yes, post Twin Towers security was increased at airports. That was a political response to a clear flaw in procedure. To some degree it probably worked. [there were other, less sane, responses too] So yes, the events cause political will to chase a goal, the prevention of future incidents. I suspect many of the supporters of this Bill genuinely believe it to be in the best interests of the population, and that they, too, have read 1984 and don't think that it is a pleasant destination.

tehwalrus 13y ago

Typical stuff from the Labour authoritarian-brigade (Straw, Johnson), joined as usual by their Tory clones. I'm surprised to see a Lib Dem signatory, but then you can find a LD somewhere who'll sign up to anything (much like academics). The more disturbing thing is the political language in the letters, first accusing the Lib Dems of exploiting "coalition niceties," rather than standing up for person liberty and privacy, and secondly by trying to make it look like corporate interests: "We find it odd that many critics of the Bill prefer to champion the rights of corporations over democratically accountable law enforcement agencies." when in fact it's about individuals' privacy from state spying! Yes broadband companies said they didn't want to be responsible for logging all this data, but that's beside the point, really. This sort of rhetoric will chime dangerously well with the tabloid-reading public, on top of the arms race against criminals/terrorists/drug addicts/whoever the "bad guys" are today -- I'm worried it will be a politically effective tactic.

alan_cx 13y ago
Just to point out, you missed out "Paedophiles".
- Torn 13y ago
  As usual, thinking of the children.
Silhouette 13y ago
I'm surprised to see a Lib Dem signatory So was I, until I recognised who it was. I don't understand exactly what Lord Carlile's position is or was in relation to government office and terrorism, but his publicly stated views seem to be about as authoritarian and illiberal as you could get.

anon1385 13y ago

This piece is by Allegra Stratton, somebody with well known ties to the Conservative party. She is giving this letter more weight than it is worth (none of those opposition MPs are part of the shadow cabinet, and their positions on this were already known as far as I remember) to try and put pressure on the Lib Dems to cave on this issue. Not that I believe Labour is going to fight this, just that this letter doesn't represent any change or "renewed pressure". John Reid, another Labour former Home Secretary, was already making a disgusting spectacle of himself all over the news in the days after Lee Rigby was murdered saying it showed the need for more government surveillance. Additionally, when Jack Straw comes out in support of some new Home Office policy, you have to put that into context. He should be facing public trial over deporting people to be tortured and lying about it[1][2], and the current government aimed to prevent that with their expansion of secret courts (part of the Justice and Security Act)[3], so he owes them big time. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Straw#Rendition_and_torture_allegations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Straw#Rendition_and_tortu... [2] http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/02/abdel-hakim-belhaj-jack-straw http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2013/apr/02/abdel-hakim-b... [3] http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/sep/25/secret-courts-the-essential-guide http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2012/sep/25/secret-courts-the-...

einhverfr 13y ago
I also suspect that the timing works against this bill. It takes brashness (and not much sense) to propose this bill at this time. Yes, in the middle of a major international scandal, let's imitate the bad guys. That's a great idea....
- ollysb 13y ago
  Or more worrying, they're buoyed by the relative lack of concern for increased surveillance.
- 7952 13y ago
  Most "normal" people have probably been bored stupid by geeks getting upset over this issue in the last week. It is possible to follow a story passively in the background, and come to a conclusion about it based on faith rather than objective reasoning. However, bad things get; a lot of people will always believe that "the war will be over by, Christmas" because it is easier to just have faith and ignore the nerds. There is a problem in how hackers/geeks/techies portray themselves. You know that this kind of monitoring is bad because if you had the data you could do bad things (but you wouldn't because of ethics). But every app still expects people to hand over the same data and to trust the developer. Expecting people to know which geeks they can trust and which are creepy is a big ask.

Fuxy 13y ago

Lol they see the outrage of the American population over the snooping programs and they think... "I want a program like that too". Talk about selfish and not working in the peoples interest.

rahoulb 13y ago
It was originally proposed a couple of years back and dropped. Then following the murder of a soldier on the streets of London it's back on the agenda. They are probably cursing the timing of the NSA revelations.
- LatvjuAvs 13y ago
  How convenient, to have some bloke kill people just in time to get new restrictions. NSA scandal was perfect, perfect timing, just wait and see how it will turn out ;)
switch007 13y ago
The current government have officially reached the "don't give a fuck" stage having destroyed this country already. There is not much they can't get away with.
cboppert 13y ago
"but moooooommmmmmmmmm, loook what Timmyyyy has!!!"

muyuu 13y ago

Nick Clegg just said "it's not going to happen with me in the government" - I'm dead worried now. They are going to push this very soon.

Silhouette 13y ago
It will be nothing but good for Nick Clegg if they do. He could threaten to break the coalition over it on a point of principle, and in doing so make amends for the tuition fees betrayal. He could put the Lib Dems back on the political map and reassert their authority for the next two years in government in a single sound-bite.

rwmj 13y ago

As one of the commenters on the BBC website points out, it's more likely this is about retrospectively legalizing what's already being done rather than anything new. After it was exposed that GCHQ "may" have been using Prism data (ie. of course they were) GCHQ employees are now open to being sued for contravening RIPA unless they can get something on the statute books pronto.

cjrp 13y ago

"The proposed Communications Data Bill does not want access to the content of our communications but does want to ensure that enough data is available in the aftermath of an attack to help investigators establish 'who, where and when' were involved in planning or supporting it." So there's a limitation in the bill which says that the proposed data can only be collected following an attack? Not that I've seen.

alan_cx 13y ago
Attack, or protest march?
Silhouette 13y ago
It's also surprising that they claim to need all these powers without a warrant if they're only going to be used after an event to try and figure out what happened. I do think it's important not to over-react to things like this and neuter the security services when they really do have legitimate grounds to investigate someone and they really are doing their jobs under a reasonable level of scrutiny and oversight. However, how often would security services really need to act so fast that they had to circumvent getting a named minister to personally sign off on their actions (and accept responsibility for them, presumably) or getting a court order for surveillance based on making a case that it was a reasonable to invade someone's privacy under the circumstances? William Hague keeps talking about how all of this spying is done under a legal framework, but I think he loses a lot of credibility making that argument as part of an administration that argues for secret courts and the like, standing next to the senior foreign representative of a nation that uses blatant legal trickery so it can detain people indefinitely without trial contrary to even its own normal legal rules. What's the point of having a legal framework if most people can't see that law in action or if you can just circumvent the framework when it's inconvenient?

GotAnyMegadeth 13y ago

What can I do, as a UK citizen, to stop this from happening?

LatvjuAvs 13y ago
What do you mean "citizen"? Do you have any rights?
westicle 13y ago
I hope you're asking this ironically.
- GotAnyMegadeth 13y ago
  No, I meant what are the best things to do in what order.
  - Silhouette 13y ago
    Contact your MP? MPs are real people and they have few enough constituents that you can make a personal connection with them. So, in terms of effectiveness, the more effort you make the more effect it is likely to have, up to a point. If you make an appointment and visit them in person, you're obviously serious, and even if they're a loyal supporter of a party whose official policy is to promote the surveillance, they'll have to look you in the eye and tell you to go away rather than just sending a form letter by automaton-mail. If enough constituents did that to fill up a few MPs' surgery days for a month, it would probably make quite a difference. Failing that, if you take the time to write a proper letter or ring them and talk to a real person at their office, at least they know you care enough to do something substantial. If you sign some e-petition or forward them the 253rd copy of a form letter on-line, it might be better than nothing, but it doesn't demonstrate much more comitment on your part than making a "me too" post on an on-line forum, so it's probably going to carry weight (or not) accordingly. You could also donate to political groups/civil rights organisations like Liberty or the Open Rights Group, if you're willing to put actual money on the line to help fund lobbying against these kinds of measures.
13y ago

mikeratcliffe 13y ago

I find that peoples understanding of this issue is way too simplistic. It won't help to stop terrorists because they will always use the internet in ways that cannot be monitored (https, VPN, etc.). It will allow the gathering of everybodies data in one place, which is dangerous as hackers are regularly gaining access to this kind of information. Another problem is that innocent people are sure to be branded as possible terrorists and refused entry on flights etc.

gaius 13y ago
Worth reading: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002 In an exercise, an enemy using a method not easy to intercept sunk the US Navy. Oops.

mindcrime 13y ago

Great, more government surveillance, that's exactly what we need. Maybe the Brits could just copy the language of the "Patriot Act" outright and implement that.

Yaa101 13y ago

They will just use it to fine more people for misplacing their trashcans, like they did with all their security programs.