6 ms·

If you're in the UK then you should contact your MP about this to let them know what you think. And you need to do it now - the vote is on Monday. Perhaps if th

by omh 12y ago

If you're in the UK then you should contact your MP about this to let them know what you think. And you need to do it now - the vote is on Monday. Perhaps if they realise what people think about this they might reconsider. Contacting your MP is easy using https://www.writetothem.com/ https://www.writetothem.com/ or the dedicated anti-DRIP page at ORG https://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/no-emergency-stop-the-data-retention-stitch-up https://www.openrightsgroup.org/campaigns/no-emergency-stop-...

tdobson 12y ago
also https://dataretentionandinvestigatorypowersbill.uk/ https://dataretentionandinvestigatorypowersbill.uk/ is worth a look at
jamescun 12y ago
By all means write to your MP, call me a pessimist but I doubt it will do much good. This government has shown no interest in listening to what the public think. We as a nation are expending all peaceful means of discourse (letters, petitions, protests, marches) on a range of topics like the sell-off of the NHS, real-terms pay cuts for public sector workers, cuts to vital services and critical welfare; and the result is no change. Even in the face of incontrovertible evidence and testimony from legions of industry experts (from all political leanings) does not sway whatever agenda the current government have. Personally I have written to my MP several times in several different constituencies only to receive back the same cookie cutter party line on the subject and addresses none of the valid concerns I raise, I hear this same from others about their MPs.
- asuffield 12y ago
  It depends a lot on who your MP is. If your MP is in a safe seat (a little under two thirds of them), they have no reason to do any more than post back the party response. If your MP is a government minister, they cannot do any more than this on any national issue which is outside their personal portfolio. If you live in a contested constituency and your MP is not a minister, you are likely to receive a more substantive response. However you should not expect them to have access to a subject-matter expert; an MP is one person with a staff of around four or five office workers.
- alextgordon 12y ago
  Unfortunately, it's not just the politicians who don't care. The people don't seem to care either: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28235699 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28235699 I loved this line: "I don't think the governments are in the business of disrupting passengers' travel plans for no reason." I think we just have to accept that this security state is going to be a permanent state of affairs. Leave while you can.
  - pling 12y ago
    This. Most people seem to buy the propaganda and support it universally.
pling 12y ago
I'm not sure most MPs give a shit about this. From experience, having written to a few over similar issues going back to the original RIPA, a blanket "there there terrorism bad m'kay" reply is about all you'll get back. The only chance for a resolution is to vote a minority party in with a decent privacy manifesto and hope the hell they stick to it. Unfortunately any chance of a change to our ward based voting scam is at the mercy of the majority populous of moronic slop thoroughly invested in "anyone different is bad" and "support our boys in their imperialist rampage" driven by the community hate machines of the Sun and the Daily Mail[1], so we're fucked. [1] I've tamed this down from some of the horrific things I've seen posted on Facebook which make me very embarrassed to be associated to this nation. The same people moaning about extremism, then within 2 minutes calling for the heads of everyone to be removed. Actually perhaps this is why we need surveillance. Should I support the bill because everyone has gone batshit? It's utterly sickening.
- switch007 12y ago
  > The only chance for a resolution is to vote a minority party in with a decent privacy manifesto and hope the hell they stick to it. I think we're beyond that. The whole system is broken i.e. government, parliament, "democracy", elections, parties etc. Really, parties, elections, government and such are just a distraction from the fact that corporations control the world.
  - pling 12y ago
    I agree entirely. I'd be a noisy activist but I'd rather subvert the system silently and educate my children to be ethical, upstanding and to quietly have zero respect for implied authority. Better a grey man[1] than a dead man walking. [1] from the survivalist wingnuts, but a valid philosophy: "Grey man - an individual who possesses the skills, ability and intent to blend into any situation or surrounding without standing out, concealing his or her true skills, ability, and intent from others."
  - pjc50 12y ago
    Put down the "corporations" outrage and realise that this is a case in which the "corporations" are on the losing side: ISPs obliged to retain data at their own expense in order to satisfy law enforcement. Elections still work provided that you can get people to agree with you. It's an uphill struggle on complex issues but it's far better than a violent alternative.
GotAnyMegadeth 12y ago
I never know what tone to take with writing letters to MPs. I don't want to waste a load of time on polite and subtly persuasive when they might be more influenced by the generic "angry voter". Equally, if I received some angry voter letter, I'd be inclined to vote against them just because I don't like angry people. This time I think I went too angry, because last time I think I was too polite: Dear MP, I sincerely hope you will be voting against the ridiculous "Emergency phone and internet data storage law" on Monday. Blanket surveillance of millions of innocent civilians is short sighted, reckless and dangerous. I am well aware that the excuse is to prevent terrorism, but is there any evidence at all that it will be key in terrorism prevention? We seem to be doing a pretty good job of preventing terrorism already, and any extra (possibly non existent) benefit this may bring is certainly not worth the MASSIVE loss of liberty of the people. I am disgusted and horrified that so many intelligent people in Westminster are so short sighted to think that surveillance, with is horrific brutal history, is going to "work this time". Yours sincerely, Me
- pbhjpbhj 12y ago
  >We seem to be doing a pretty good job of preventing terrorism already // The problem I see with your letter is that it may well be assumed [by your MP] that this law is merely codifying current covert practices in order to be able to force parties who have perhaps recently reneged on past agreements to allow "monitoring". In that case your statement makes a tacit approval of such codification. Also, we mortals don't necessarily have inside information of the current surveillance that is working, and so appealing to [recent] history can again seem to be an appeal founded on successful covert surveillance.
  - pjc50 12y ago
    in order to be able to force parties who have perhaps recently reneged on past agreements to allow "monitoring" I'm not clear what this refers to? inside information of the current surveillance that is working This is a serious problem with the whole thing. It's very difficult to bring under democratic control because it's not public. There are a few convictions, but overall we have no idea how real the threat is. Some of us fear we're being sold the proverbial tiger-repelling rock. Then there's the abuses. Mostly these come out thirty years later, but there are currently questions of torture, of feeding data to the drone strike programme, of targeting nonviolent left wing protestors, etc. Then there's the apparent failure to prosecute serious crimes by members of the establishment, of which the latest is the alleged missing paedophile dossier that passed across Leon Brittan's desk.

by omh 12y ago

tdobson 12y ago

also https://dataretentionandinvestigatorypowersbill.uk/ https://dataretentionandinvestigatorypowersbill.uk/ is worth a look at

jamescun 12y ago

By all means write to your MP, call me a pessimist but I doubt it will do much good. This government has shown no interest in listening to what the public think. We as a nation are expending all peaceful means of discourse (letters, petitions, protests, marches) on a range of topics like the sell-off of the NHS, real-terms pay cuts for public sector workers, cuts to vital services and critical welfare; and the result is no change. Even in the face of incontrovertible evidence and testimony from legions of industry experts (from all political leanings) does not sway whatever agenda the current government have. Personally I have written to my MP several times in several different constituencies only to receive back the same cookie cutter party line on the subject and addresses none of the valid concerns I raise, I hear this same from others about their MPs.

asuffield 12y ago
It depends a lot on who your MP is. If your MP is in a safe seat (a little under two thirds of them), they have no reason to do any more than post back the party response. If your MP is a government minister, they cannot do any more than this on any national issue which is outside their personal portfolio. If you live in a contested constituency and your MP is not a minister, you are likely to receive a more substantive response. However you should not expect them to have access to a subject-matter expert; an MP is one person with a staff of around four or five office workers.
alextgordon 12y ago
Unfortunately, it's not just the politicians who don't care. The people don't seem to care either: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28235699 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28235699 I loved this line: "I don't think the governments are in the business of disrupting passengers' travel plans for no reason." I think we just have to accept that this security state is going to be a permanent state of affairs. Leave while you can.
- pling 12y ago
  This. Most people seem to buy the propaganda and support it universally.

pling 12y ago

I'm not sure most MPs give a shit about this. From experience, having written to a few over similar issues going back to the original RIPA, a blanket "there there terrorism bad m'kay" reply is about all you'll get back. The only chance for a resolution is to vote a minority party in with a decent privacy manifesto and hope the hell they stick to it. Unfortunately any chance of a change to our ward based voting scam is at the mercy of the majority populous of moronic slop thoroughly invested in "anyone different is bad" and "support our boys in their imperialist rampage" driven by the community hate machines of the Sun and the Daily Mail[1], so we're fucked. [1] I've tamed this down from some of the horrific things I've seen posted on Facebook which make me very embarrassed to be associated to this nation. The same people moaning about extremism, then within 2 minutes calling for the heads of everyone to be removed. Actually perhaps this is why we need surveillance. Should I support the bill because everyone has gone batshit? It's utterly sickening.

switch007 12y ago
> The only chance for a resolution is to vote a minority party in with a decent privacy manifesto and hope the hell they stick to it. I think we're beyond that. The whole system is broken i.e. government, parliament, "democracy", elections, parties etc. Really, parties, elections, government and such are just a distraction from the fact that corporations control the world.
- pling 12y ago
  I agree entirely. I'd be a noisy activist but I'd rather subvert the system silently and educate my children to be ethical, upstanding and to quietly have zero respect for implied authority. Better a grey man[1] than a dead man walking. [1] from the survivalist wingnuts, but a valid philosophy: "Grey man - an individual who possesses the skills, ability and intent to blend into any situation or surrounding without standing out, concealing his or her true skills, ability, and intent from others."
- pjc50 12y ago
  Put down the "corporations" outrage and realise that this is a case in which the "corporations" are on the losing side: ISPs obliged to retain data at their own expense in order to satisfy law enforcement. Elections still work provided that you can get people to agree with you. It's an uphill struggle on complex issues but it's far better than a violent alternative.

GotAnyMegadeth 12y ago

I never know what tone to take with writing letters to MPs. I don't want to waste a load of time on polite and subtly persuasive when they might be more influenced by the generic "angry voter". Equally, if I received some angry voter letter, I'd be inclined to vote against them just because I don't like angry people. This time I think I went too angry, because last time I think I was too polite: Dear MP, I sincerely hope you will be voting against the ridiculous "Emergency phone and internet data storage law" on Monday. Blanket surveillance of millions of innocent civilians is short sighted, reckless and dangerous. I am well aware that the excuse is to prevent terrorism, but is there any evidence at all that it will be key in terrorism prevention? We seem to be doing a pretty good job of preventing terrorism already, and any extra (possibly non existent) benefit this may bring is certainly not worth the MASSIVE loss of liberty of the people. I am disgusted and horrified that so many intelligent people in Westminster are so short sighted to think that surveillance, with is horrific brutal history, is going to "work this time". Yours sincerely, Me

pbhjpbhj 12y ago
>We seem to be doing a pretty good job of preventing terrorism already // The problem I see with your letter is that it may well be assumed [by your MP] that this law is merely codifying current covert practices in order to be able to force parties who have perhaps recently reneged on past agreements to allow "monitoring". In that case your statement makes a tacit approval of such codification. Also, we mortals don't necessarily have inside information of the current surveillance that is working, and so appealing to [recent] history can again seem to be an appeal founded on successful covert surveillance.
- pjc50 12y ago
  in order to be able to force parties who have perhaps recently reneged on past agreements to allow "monitoring" I'm not clear what this refers to? inside information of the current surveillance that is working This is a serious problem with the whole thing. It's very difficult to bring under democratic control because it's not public. There are a few convictions, but overall we have no idea how real the threat is. Some of us fear we're being sold the proverbial tiger-repelling rock. Then there's the abuses. Mostly these come out thirty years later, but there are currently questions of torture, of feeding data to the drone strike programme, of targeting nonviolent left wing protestors, etc. Then there's the apparent failure to prosecute serious crimes by members of the establishment, of which the latest is the alleged missing paedophile dossier that passed across Leon Brittan's desk.