UK 'Snooper's Charter' Torn Up; Now What?
from the not-over-yet dept
Since the UK government published the draft version of its Communications Data Bill -- better known as the "snooper's charter" -- with plans to store data about every British citizen's emails, mobile calls and visits to Web sites, there has been almost total opposition to it from everyone else. Indeed, there has been growing resistance even within the UK government's ranks, largely from the smaller of the coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats. Here's what the party's leader and Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, has been up to, as described by one of the Liberal Democrat MPs, Julian Huppert:
Nick refused to allow the Bill to go ahead, and forced the Home Office to publish the Bill as a draft, allowing us all to see what the Home Office were planning. Nick appointed Paul Strasburger and I onto a Committee to scrutinise it in detail. We went through the evidence, heard from many experts and published a cross-party report. This was damming of the Home Office proposals -- it unanimously describe some of the Home Office information as 'fanciful and misleading'.
However, instead of trying to answer the huge range of criticisms of the proposed Bill, the Home Office simply insisted that such an intrusive system of surveillance was needed. As a result:
Following Nick's intervention and our report, the Home Office was given the chance to rethink. To build a proper case and look for proposals which were proportionate to the problem.Nick has just this morning announced that he has killed off the Data Communications Bill, dubbed the "snooper’s charter".
By withdrawing the support of the Liberal Democrats, Clegg makes it practically impossible to pass the Bill, since the UK government will lack the requisite majority to push it through. However, this is by no means the end of the story.
Clegg will be under huge pressure from the Prime Minister, David Cameron, and his Conservative party colleagues, to agree to some slightly watered-down proposals. Cameron will doubtless invoke all the usual reasons -- tackling terrorism, paedophiles, organized crime etc. -- knowing that this plays well with enough of the electorate that Clegg won't be able to ignore it completely. So we can probably expect to see new plans in due course. The question then becomes to what extent they address the huge flaws in the original snooper's charter, and whether they represent an approach that is truly "proportionate to the problem", as the cross-party report puts it. If they don't, the battle will doubtless begin again.
Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: nick clegg, snooper's charter, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
What, they're kicking Google out?
Why is that okay if a supposedly commercial entity does it?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Information is power
Information is power. The Internet facilitates the spread of information. For a government to maintain its monopoly over democratic self-rule, it is therefore essential for the government to have a surplus of information and for the people to have far less of it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What, they're kicking Google out?
It's not necessarily OK (depends on how it's used), but at least there's a degree of separation between commercial entities and the government. That separation is also why the US government cares so much about CISPA.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What, they're kicking Google out?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What, they're kicking Google out?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What, they're kicking Google out?
Because you can, as I do, choose not to use that service.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
/s
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
by the way
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What, they're kicking Google out?
A/ At least one has a choice whether to give the commercial entity the data. In contrast the government compels information whether one wants them to have it or not.
B/ In the UK there are, at least theoretically, limits as to what the commercial entity can do with the data gathered.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What, they're kicking Google out?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What, they're kicking Google out?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Information is power
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Orwell 1984
[ link to this | view in thread ]