Less Than A Week After Failing Last Attempt, UK Lords Try To Sneak Through Snooper's Charter Once Again
from the total-failure dept
A week ago, we noted that a group of UK Lords were trying to rush through the "Snooper's Charter" that had previously been rejected by the UK. The bill, of course, was about giving the government tremendous levels of access to everyone's electronic data with little oversight. Thankfully, despite having little notice, the attempt caused a flurry of attention and the Lords were forced to back off the plan. It seemed like another good "win" for supporters of privacy and democracy.Many people still expected the UK government to try again, but few expected it would happen so soon. Yes, less than a week after having the last attempt rejected vocally, the same group of Lords are trying yet again:
As David Meyer at GigaOm notes, just as with the last time, this bill lets any "relevant public authority" get access to the data, meaning that such data will be widely accessed and almost certainly widely abused as well. It appears that there are only very minor cosmetic changes between what was proposed and rejected last week and what has been proposed this week. Of course, it won't surprise you to learn the backgrounds of those pushing for this information:On Saturday, ahead of a “report stage” debate on Monday (the Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill is almost fully baked), Lords West, Blair, Carlile and King introduced a new amendment that appears to be almost identical to the last, and to the Communications Data Bill before it.
Again, this new amendment would force “telecommunications operators” – which these days includes the likes of Facebook and Skype, as well as traditional telcos – to store communications metadata for up to a year and hand it over to U.K. authorities when requested. This data retention regime may require the providers to install “specified equipment or systems.”
The four peers in question all come from the security establishment — a former Metropolitan Police commissioner (Blair), a former secretary of defense (King), a former minister for security and counter-terrorism (West), and a former government anti-terror adviser (Carlile).Meyer also quotes Lord King saying that he doesn't know about or understand the various new social media services like WhatsApp and SnapChat, "but what is absolutely clear is that the terrorists and jihadists do" -- which is why he thinks the Snooper's Charter is needed. In other words, he admits his own ignorance, but doesn't seem to care, because he is ruled by irrational fear. That does not seem like a particularly intelligent way to govern or to legislate.
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: democracy, lords, snooper's charter, terrorism, uk
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
They'll never stop, neither can we
-Thomas Jefferson
People like them, those who would destroy the rights and freedoms of those they pretend to serve and protect, will never stop trying to do so. Whether it's because they truly believe that to protect the rights of the public they must eliminate those same rights, or whether it's for personal gain, they will always try again, no matter how many times their efforts are shot down.
Make no mistake about it, the odds are almost entirely in their favor. Those that oppose them, those that would protect the rights and freedom of the public, they have to succeed every single time. Those that would destroy the rights of the public? Strip them of their freedom and curtail or destroy their rights, all in the name of 'safety'? They have to succeed once.
Just once, since once something is on the books, it is all but impossible to get it removed, and what politician would have the spine, the courage, to vote to repeal a law supposedly designed to catch and/or stop terrorists? Or criminals? How many politicians would be willing to put their career, and cushy position on the line and say 'No, they may be terrible people, they may be absolute scum, but just because they act that way doesn't give us the right to do the same, and they deserve the same fair treatment under the law that anyone else would get'?
Once the law is in the books, it's there to stay, and once one law is there, many more 'additions' and 'minor expansions' are sure to follow. 'For the children', or 'For public safety'.
They bank on people becoming complacent, or on people becoming worn down, making attempt after attempt in an effort to sap the morale of those that would oppose them, allowing them to eventually slip through unopposed, their opposition too tired to fight back, too jaded with 'Why try and stop them, they'll just try again next week?'
It may seem like a nigh impossible, never ending struggle, and really, that's a pretty good way to describe it. However, what worthy goal doesn't require struggle, require that you fight to attain it?
Fighting back against those that would take the rights and freedoms away from those they claim to serve is not, and never will be easy, but the cost of not doing so is far, far too high to even consider anything else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: They'll never stop, neither can we
"You gotta admit, I played this stinking city like a harp from hell!"
~Penguin
There are a lot of Penguins running around!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: They'll never stop, neither can we
But please take heart in the knowledge that people who want to change the direction power is going in have always been in the minority, and yet manage to get positive change done regardless.
Heck, even the American revolutionary war wasn't supported by the majority of the colonists.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: They'll never stop, neither can we
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: They'll never stop, neither can we
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Intelligent legislators?
I've never yet in all my reading of history come across an example of any state finding an intelligent way to legislate. People in power, on the whole, tend to act in their own perceived interest, and they cannot believe anyone else does otherwise.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Intelligent legislators?
(Careful you don't use advanced game theory, or you'll wind up with an economist.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Democracy
So tell me: how do you get to vote particularly intelligently, and who will register the difference?
While I am aware that in this particular UK-borne disease, I mean, case nobody votes in the Lords, this is a more general problem.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Democracy
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Anonymous Coward on Feb 2nd, 2015 @ 3:19am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
BTW, a Discordia's most aneristic eristic, I am duty bound to point out that chaos is a form of order. It is most definitely not an example of randomness even though it looks like it to our puny minds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
English Only!
You know what else they understand? Foreign languages! And they use those foreign languages to make their plans so that the rest of us won't catch on! It's time to outlaw foreign languages!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: English Only!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: English Only!
guns
Knifes
profitable businesses (someones paying for those guns)
cars
so when are we going to ban guns, knives, cars and profits?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: English Only!
They use money
Lets ban money
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Can we please start calling law enforcement INCOMPETENTS? Because if they are advocating mass collection of data this is what they are. Instead do your goddamn investigative work and target the people that are the problem, yes? And if one or two attacks happen once in a while it happens, even total surveillance is not impervious to failure.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I don't see any failure. This is the "we already did everything we could legally, so we need to do more of the same including the currently illegal stuff which we actually already did" defense.
How else are you supposed to shout "Fire!" in a crowded theatre? Do you want to leave the abolishment of civil rights to the terrorists?
Think of the children!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
See, Even Teh Limeys Lord King Understands Terrorism
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tyrants use governments.......lets ban governments........no!?, i didnt fucking think so
What a shortsighted way to look at the overall bigger picture........create NEW problems today so future genrerations can fix tomorow.......thats IF they mangae to fix this NEW thing that wasnt their yesterday...........how have they fixed the nuke problem amongst other things.......something NEW, as THIS is........dictated by the few, OUR lives affected........what gives them the righ without consent
You know what this kinda news inspires me to think, that the system is BROKEN.......that this kind of thing happens, and the system allows it...i.e. BROKEN
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Techdirt continues to be totally ignorant of British government
The House of Lords does not make laws. It has no such power. It reads bills and most of the time it amends them so they won't be reversed by British law courts (yes, we have a judiciary totally independent of political influence, unlike your country). Bills go back to the Commons to be voted on to become laws by a vote. I know you can't grasp the concept because so many of your country's industries write laws for your politicians but we don't allow an unelected body to pass laws.
Please stop writing uninformed crap.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Techdirt continues to be totally ignorant of British government
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Techdirt continues to be totally ignorant of British government
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Techdirt continues to be totally ignorant of British government
I am aware of how the UK government works, thank you.
Now, do you have an actual critique of the facts in the article?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Oh dear, indeed we have.
We, the uber-rich, can now do it correctly.
Hitler's fascist backers lacked the computer and mass television disinformation dissemination and global public surveillance, and globally chlorinated drinking water and toxic mercenary medicine, but we got all those things now and way, way more that we haven't even tested yet.
So this time we millionaires, bankers and corporatists can do it right and establish a new feudal system on earth with ourselves as the Lords of the Land, and there is nothing the peasants can do to stop us because we are doing it all legally and by the book!
Of course, we had to rewrite the book first, but that does not count. Its what the book says now that counts, and it says "We win, You lose."
hehehehehehehe
Hitler would be so proud of US!
For we the wealthy, it will be heaven on earth and we will be the new gods and we will do as we see fit without consequences, forever.
---
[ link to this | view in chronology ]