4 ms·

It seems like this is proposed in the same way the Patriot Act was proposed to the public. "We need this to go after those suspected of terrorism". Yet the bill

It seems like this is proposed in the same way the Patriot Act was proposed to the public. "We need this to go after those suspected of terrorism". Yet the bill allowed them to intercept data of many more people and not just for terrorism, but drug crimes and so on. If what they really need is to go after "suspected terrorists", then all they should need is a warrant from a judge. But of course this bill is not about that. It's about spying on everyone, and about censoring "extremist speech" (I assume the government gets to decide what is extremist, too, and not a judge?). Checks and balances are supposed to exist for a reason. We've played this game before giving governments total power to "do stuff", including "protecting us", "improve the economy", "national security", whatever. It doesn't end well for the population. In fact, it ends exponentially worse than any "threat" mentioned when the government asks for such powers, for every single person, not just those "who have something to hide" or are "extremist".

hahainternet 11y ago
This was proposed many years ago but blocked by the Lib Dems. Now the people of the UK destroyed the Lib Dems, there's nobody to oppose this. A lesson in picking the lesser of evils. Nobody will learn it though, and the UK is screwed for the forseeable future.
- qrmn 11y ago
  Not many years ago - just 3! The Tories have a slimmer majority now than they had in the coalition, and a Lords which isn't all roses and flowers about this. And the Lib Dems (in one of the few promises they actually kept) sent the Draft Communications Data Bill rejected last time over to an independent parliamentary committee - which promptly savaged its drafting and lack of consultation, amongst other things: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/draft-communications-bill/news/full-publication-of-report/ http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/... If the Tories come back with the same draft or worse, it will have a very hard time. I've written to my MP already - and got a copy-pasted bit of Tory party manifesto back, which indicates how much thought she's put into it so far I suppose - but it does at least contain a paragraph about not wanting to propose sweeping mass surveillance legislation obviously, which this in fact is, so I'm going to reply again when I have sight of the draft to pick out the specific problems. I can at least try to get her to read it and reflect my concerns.
  - robin_reala 11y ago
    My Tory MP is a party whip; I’ve given up on writing to her.
    - adwf 11y ago
      That's slightly better than having Theresa May :( No luck with any letters I've sent there!
      - JupiterMoon 11y ago
        I still believe that it is worth it. She is I hope/believe a frighten old woman who simply does not understand the world and is lashing out irrationally (the alternative explanation for the laws she wants to pass don't bear thinking about). Intelligent letters may help to quell her fear and help her understand. Or at the very least let her know that she is losing voters.
  - Someone1234 11y ago
    By tradition the HoL won't block laws which a party ran on during an election. So because the Tories ran on this, it massively curtails what the Lords can do unless they break from tradition (which is highly unlikely). All the Lords can do, is amend it and send it back to the commons until they're happy. And typically they only do that if they feel there are legal problems (e.g. ECHR/EU challenges). So I guess what I am saying is: Don't expect the Lords to block this. If it is a manifesto promise they cannot/will not.
- alextgordon 11y ago
  The Lib Dems were destroyed because their core vote hated them. A lesson in not double-crossing your core vote. Edit: Apparently the Lib Dems are universally loved, and never did anything wrong. I retract my statement.
  - zelos 11y ago
    14,000 new members of the Lib Dems since the election would suggest it's not as simple as that.
  - Super_Jambo 11y ago
    It was definitely significantly more complex than that, the loss of short money was I think a factor.
  - hahainternet 11y ago
    > A lesson in not double-crossing your core vote The thing is, even if they did that, they actually were an effective moderate voice. They did actually prevent exactly this sort of thing previously. They should be judged on their achievements, not on an unachievable election promise. An election they didn't win.

hahainternet 11y ago

This was proposed many years ago but blocked by the Lib Dems. Now the people of the UK destroyed the Lib Dems, there's nobody to oppose this. A lesson in picking the lesser of evils. Nobody will learn it though, and the UK is screwed for the forseeable future.

qrmn 11y ago
Not many years ago - just 3! The Tories have a slimmer majority now than they had in the coalition, and a Lords which isn't all roses and flowers about this. And the Lib Dems (in one of the few promises they actually kept) sent the Draft Communications Data Bill rejected last time over to an independent parliamentary committee - which promptly savaged its drafting and lack of consultation, amongst other things: http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/joint-select/draft-communications-bill/news/full-publication-of-report/ http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/... If the Tories come back with the same draft or worse, it will have a very hard time. I've written to my MP already - and got a copy-pasted bit of Tory party manifesto back, which indicates how much thought she's put into it so far I suppose - but it does at least contain a paragraph about not wanting to propose sweeping mass surveillance legislation obviously, which this in fact is, so I'm going to reply again when I have sight of the draft to pick out the specific problems. I can at least try to get her to read it and reflect my concerns.
- robin_reala 11y ago
  My Tory MP is a party whip; I’ve given up on writing to her.
  - adwf 11y ago
    That's slightly better than having Theresa May :( No luck with any letters I've sent there!
    - JupiterMoon 11y ago
      I still believe that it is worth it. She is I hope/believe a frighten old woman who simply does not understand the world and is lashing out irrationally (the alternative explanation for the laws she wants to pass don't bear thinking about). Intelligent letters may help to quell her fear and help her understand. Or at the very least let her know that she is losing voters.
- Someone1234 11y ago
  By tradition the HoL won't block laws which a party ran on during an election. So because the Tories ran on this, it massively curtails what the Lords can do unless they break from tradition (which is highly unlikely). All the Lords can do, is amend it and send it back to the commons until they're happy. And typically they only do that if they feel there are legal problems (e.g. ECHR/EU challenges). So I guess what I am saying is: Don't expect the Lords to block this. If it is a manifesto promise they cannot/will not.
alextgordon 11y ago
The Lib Dems were destroyed because their core vote hated them. A lesson in not double-crossing your core vote. Edit: Apparently the Lib Dems are universally loved, and never did anything wrong. I retract my statement.
- zelos 11y ago
  14,000 new members of the Lib Dems since the election would suggest it's not as simple as that.
- Super_Jambo 11y ago
  It was definitely significantly more complex than that, the loss of short money was I think a factor.
- hahainternet 11y ago
  > A lesson in not double-crossing your core vote The thing is, even if they did that, they actually were an effective moderate voice. They did actually prevent exactly this sort of thing previously. They should be judged on their achievements, not on an unachievable election promise. An election they didn't win.