This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2012/jun/14/snoopers-charte-proposal-tory-row
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| 'Snoopers' charter' proposal sparks Tory row | 'Snoopers' charter' proposal sparks Tory row |
| (4 months later) | |
| The government is to offer a blank cheque to internet and phone firms that will be required to track everyone's email, Twitter, Facebook and other internet use under legislation to be published on Thursday. | The government is to offer a blank cheque to internet and phone firms that will be required to track everyone's email, Twitter, Facebook and other internet use under legislation to be published on Thursday. |
| The disclosure means the taxpayer could face an as-yet-unspecified bill running into hundreds of millions of pounds for the "internet snooping scheme". | The disclosure means the taxpayer could face an as-yet-unspecified bill running into hundreds of millions of pounds for the "internet snooping scheme". |
| It came as the former Conservative shadow home secretary, David Davis, accused the home secretary, Theresa May, of proposing an "incredibly intrusive'' scheme that was exactly the same as the proposal David Cameron had attacked when Labour proposed it in office. | It came as the former Conservative shadow home secretary, David Davis, accused the home secretary, Theresa May, of proposing an "incredibly intrusive'' scheme that was exactly the same as the proposal David Cameron had attacked when Labour proposed it in office. |
| May, in turn, branded the scheme's critics "conspiracy theorists", risking an even deeper breach with her own party's libertarian wing over the plan. | May, in turn, branded the scheme's critics "conspiracy theorists", risking an even deeper breach with her own party's libertarian wing over the plan. |
| The Home Office has confirmed it will foot the bill, thought to run into tens and possibly hundreds of millions, for collecting and storing the extra social media and web browsing records needed to implement the scheme, which critics have dubbed an "online snooper's charter". | The Home Office has confirmed it will foot the bill, thought to run into tens and possibly hundreds of millions, for collecting and storing the extra social media and web browsing records needed to implement the scheme, which critics have dubbed an "online snooper's charter". |
| Ministers did not put a figure on the cost of the scheme but said it would be far less than the £2bn price tag estimated when Labour put forward a web-tracking scheme based on a central Home Office database in 2006. | Ministers did not put a figure on the cost of the scheme but said it would be far less than the £2bn price tag estimated when Labour put forward a web-tracking scheme based on a central Home Office database in 2006. |
| The communications data police and intelligence services may seek about an individual under the communications bill includes email addresses and phone numbers of people who have been in contact, when this happened, and where, the details giving the police records of suspects' associates and activities. It will remain the case that they will not be allowed to access the content of emails, texts, mobile calls and other confidential web use without a warrant signed by the home secretary. | The communications data police and intelligence services may seek about an individual under the communications bill includes email addresses and phone numbers of people who have been in contact, when this happened, and where, the details giving the police records of suspects' associates and activities. It will remain the case that they will not be allowed to access the content of emails, texts, mobile calls and other confidential web use without a warrant signed by the home secretary. |
| The Liberal Democrats are expected to scale back their criticism of the legislation, which is to be published in draft form on Thursday, after Nick Clegg's intervention secured a series of safeguards, including a scrutiny inquiry by MPs and peers that will report by the end of November. | The Liberal Democrats are expected to scale back their criticism of the legislation, which is to be published in draft form on Thursday, after Nick Clegg's intervention secured a series of safeguards, including a scrutiny inquiry by MPs and peers that will report by the end of November. |
| May dismissed critics of the new powers, which will allow police and intelligence services to track Facebook, Twitter, email and other web use, as "conspiracy theorists". She defended the 550,000 individual requests for data each year made by security officials as a vital tool to catch serious criminals and terrorists. | May dismissed critics of the new powers, which will allow police and intelligence services to track Facebook, Twitter, email and other web use, as "conspiracy theorists". She defended the 550,000 individual requests for data each year made by security officials as a vital tool to catch serious criminals and terrorists. |
| She told the Sun: "I just don't understand why some people might criticise these proposals. I have no doubt conspiracy theorists will come up with some ridiculous claims about how these measures are an infringement of freedom. But without changing the law, the only freedom we would protect is that of criminals, terrorists and paedophiles." | She told the Sun: "I just don't understand why some people might criticise these proposals. I have no doubt conspiracy theorists will come up with some ridiculous claims about how these measures are an infringement of freedom. But without changing the law, the only freedom we would protect is that of criminals, terrorists and paedophiles." |
| May's comments were backed by the Metropolitan police commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, who wrote in the Times that the powers could be "a matter of life and death". | May's comments were backed by the Metropolitan police commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, who wrote in the Times that the powers could be "a matter of life and death". |
| He said having greater powers to access data was essential to waging a "total war on crime" and that police risked losing the fight against crime unless parliament passed a law enabling them to collect more communications data. | He said having greater powers to access data was essential to waging a "total war on crime" and that police risked losing the fight against crime unless parliament passed a law enabling them to collect more communications data. |
| "Put simply, the police need access to this information to keep up with the criminals who bring so much harm to victims and our society." | "Put simply, the police need access to this information to keep up with the criminals who bring so much harm to victims and our society." |
| But the measure is expected to continue to attract fierce criticism from libertarian Conservatives. | But the measure is expected to continue to attract fierce criticism from libertarian Conservatives. |
| Davis said the fact that there were already half a million requests each year from the police and intelligence services showed just how intrusive it was. | Davis said the fact that there were already half a million requests each year from the police and intelligence services showed just how intrusive it was. |
| "This is exactly the same thing that Labour proposed in 2009. They went from a central database to this and we attacked it fiercely. In fact, David Cameron attacked it," said Davis, referring to a period when the Conservatives were campaigning against the spread of the "surveillance society". | "This is exactly the same thing that Labour proposed in 2009. They went from a central database to this and we attacked it fiercely. In fact, David Cameron attacked it," said Davis, referring to a period when the Conservatives were campaigning against the spread of the "surveillance society". |
| He said serious criminals would quickly find other ways to communicate and the only people it would catch were the innocent and the incompetent. | He said serious criminals would quickly find other ways to communicate and the only people it would catch were the innocent and the incompetent. |
| "It's not content, but it's incredibly intrusive," Davis told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. "If they really want to do things like this – and we all accept they use data to catch criminals – get a warrant. Get a judge to sign a warrant, not the guy at the next desk, not somebody else in the same organisation." | "It's not content, but it's incredibly intrusive," Davis told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. "If they really want to do things like this – and we all accept they use data to catch criminals – get a warrant. Get a judge to sign a warrant, not the guy at the next desk, not somebody else in the same organisation." |
| An online petition run by the campaign group 38 Degrees has attracted more than 163,000 signatures under the slogan: "Our civil liberties have taken a battering in recent years from politicians of all backgrounds. Now it's time to for us to push back." | An online petition run by the campaign group 38 Degrees has attracted more than 163,000 signatures under the slogan: "Our civil liberties have taken a battering in recent years from politicians of all backgrounds. Now it's time to for us to push back." |
| Tom Brake, co-chair of the Lib Dem home affairs committee, said the decision to publish the bill in draft meant there was an opportunity to examine all its aspects before it was voted on in parliament. | Tom Brake, co-chair of the Lib Dem home affairs committee, said the decision to publish the bill in draft meant there was an opportunity to examine all its aspects before it was voted on in parliament. |
| He said there was no objection in principle to extending the capability of the police and security services to access communications data from emails, texts and mobile phones to Twitter, Facebook and other social media. But the party wanted assurances that it was technically possible to access the "who sent what to whom, when and where" traffic data without accessing content – a point about which there is much debate. | He said there was no objection in principle to extending the capability of the police and security services to access communications data from emails, texts and mobile phones to Twitter, Facebook and other social media. But the party wanted assurances that it was technically possible to access the "who sent what to whom, when and where" traffic data without accessing content – a point about which there is much debate. |
| Brake said the Lib Dems wanted to see the list of state agencies that could not access such personal data without a warrant extended to cover bodies such as the Food Standards Agency. He also wanted to know what proportion of the 550,000 requests for communications data each year successfully contributed to investigations, and whether it was possible to reduce the volume. | Brake said the Lib Dems wanted to see the list of state agencies that could not access such personal data without a warrant extended to cover bodies such as the Food Standards Agency. He also wanted to know what proportion of the 550,000 requests for communications data each year successfully contributed to investigations, and whether it was possible to reduce the volume. |
| The safeguards secured by Clegg include the joint scrutiny committee of MPs and peers, who will hear expert evidence, including from the Home Office, and examine all aspects to ensure the measure is not "rammed through parliament". It has already been quietly agreed that the committee should report by the end of November, implying a timetable that could see the measure on the statute book within 12 months. | The safeguards secured by Clegg include the joint scrutiny committee of MPs and peers, who will hear expert evidence, including from the Home Office, and examine all aspects to ensure the measure is not "rammed through parliament". It has already been quietly agreed that the committee should report by the end of November, implying a timetable that could see the measure on the statute book within 12 months. |
| It is expected that inquiries into the bill will be mounted by parliament's intelligence and security and home affairs committees before it emerges in its final form. | It is expected that inquiries into the bill will be mounted by parliament's intelligence and security and home affairs committees before it emerges in its final form. |
| Other safeguards to be detailed in the draft bill are a "case-by-case" oversight by the interception of the communications surveillance commissioner, the publication of a privacy impact statement, and powers for the information commissioner to ensure the stored data is kept secure then destroyed when the 12-month retention period expires. | Other safeguards to be detailed in the draft bill are a "case-by-case" oversight by the interception of the communications surveillance commissioner, the publication of a privacy impact statement, and powers for the information commissioner to ensure the stored data is kept secure then destroyed when the 12-month retention period expires. |
| Individuals who feel they have been subject to unlawful tracking will be able to complain to a panel of senior judges in the investigatory powers tribunal. | Individuals who feel they have been subject to unlawful tracking will be able to complain to a panel of senior judges in the investigatory powers tribunal. |
| Internet and phone companies are already required to give the police and security services access to the communications data they retain for their own billing and business purposes. But the Home Office states that the rapidly changing nature of the net, including the widespread use of social media that is not billed item by item, means that this power is no longer sufficient for tracking the activities of criminals online. | Internet and phone companies are already required to give the police and security services access to the communications data they retain for their own billing and business purposes. But the Home Office states that the rapidly changing nature of the net, including the widespread use of social media that is not billed item by item, means that this power is no longer sufficient for tracking the activities of criminals online. |
| Officials say 25% of requests for communications data by the police and security agencies can no longer be met. | Officials say 25% of requests for communications data by the police and security agencies can no longer be met. |
| Comments | |
| 272 comments, displaying first | |
| 14 June 2012 9:56AM | |
| David Davies is probably the only acceptable face of conservatism. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 9:57AM | |
| So it's all austerity, cut, slash, make do with less, unless.... | |
| It's about keeping tabs on what people say and think. | |
| Then it's spend spend spend spend. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 9:58AM | |
| "Conspiracy theorists"? Here's a theory, Theresa May is a fascist, this Government are fascist, and so have all the other Governments been. | |
| It's all about control. They want to control us, the people. | |
| I am sick and tired of the BS and hypocrisy. One law for some and another law for the rest of us. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 9:59AM | |
| Any remotely competent criminal or terrorist, anybody who poses any serious threat, will be able to circumvent this surveillance with ease. This is not just an outrageous assault on liberty, but also a ridiculous waste of money. If you ask the police and security services they will always tell you they need more powers, but there needs to be a measure of common sense. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 9:59AM | |
| Lets see how fast Theresa May backtracks when there is a massive leak of her emails and private internet details. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:01AM | |
| What I want to know is what happens if this goes through and we get a government down the line that redefines what it means to be a criminal or terrorist - where today's law-abiding citizen is the criminal of the future? | |
| Actually, I already know, I just have to read something like 1984 or V for Vendetta. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:01AM | |
| An online petition run by the campaign group 38 degrees has already attracted more than 163,000 signatures | |
| I expect they will want a list of those names. | |
| Individuals who feel they have been subject to unlawful tracking will be able to complain to a panel of senior judges in the investigatory powers tribunal. | |
| Funny. I suspect we won't be able to tell if we are being tracked "legally" or "illegally". | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:04AM | |
| 1984 is truly here. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:04AM | |
| This is 'data retention' - 12 years ago 'they' wanted 7 years of data - now they only want 12 months - progress of a sort. | |
| http://cryptome.org/ncis-carnivore.htm | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:04AM | |
| May, in turn, branded the scheme's critics "conspiracy theorists" | |
| It isn't paranoia if they are actually watching. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:06AM | |
| Is the Labour Party going to oppose this though? | |
| Has Miliband got the guts to repudiate New Labour on this? | |
| Dont hold your breath | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:07AM | |
| A 'conspiracy theorist': someone who believes that those in power are self-serving and their influence is therefore often bought by powerful groups in a secretive fashion, while nevertheless continuing the pretense that they care about the public good. | |
| Surely in the modern US or UK every sane person is a conspiracy theorist? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:07AM | |
| Conspiracy theorists? You mean like the Tories and the Lib Dems in opposition? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:07AM | |
| Next stop 'This Perfect Day'. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:08AM | |
| HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE WE SEE THE THOUGHT POLICE AT WORK IN THIS SELF STYLED LAND OF THE FREE? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:08AM | |
| £60 per annum for a Dutch VPN account, you know it makes sense. | |
| What a total waste of time and money, give me strength. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:09AM | |
| Yes and by the time this lot get everything in place there won't be a cat in hells chance of doing anything about it. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:10AM | |
| If there is a conspiracy against you it may be quite reasonable to be a 'conspiracy theorist'. Theories can be true. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:12AM | |
| Let me make it clear to anyone reading this legally or illegally: I do not trust any home secretary or chief police officer or police commissioner or any governtment quango with my personal and private data. | |
| I didn't when NuLab were in power and I don't now ConDem are in power. | |
| I am neither neurotic about it or feel there is a conspiracy against me, but once again it just lazy government. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:15AM | |
| There is a pattern emerging. A few weeks ago the media were briefed that this was being shelved, because of the adverse headlines. Then up it suddenly pops again. A bit like the NHS reform 'pause' before it was rammed throgh against universal opposition. Combined with manipulation and redefinition of meaurement ( cancelling patient appointments to get waiting times down, removing those assigned to the work gangs as employed, even though the taxpayer is still paying dole, changing the indicators of poverty to argue poverty is going down) we see a spin and propaganda blitz never seen in Britain. Of course, the BBC laps it all up as 'fact.' | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:15AM | |
| She told the Sun: "I just don't understand why some people might criticise these proposals. I have no doubt conspiracy theorists will come up with some ridiculous claims about how these measures are an infringement of freedom. But without changing the law, the only freedom we would protect is that of criminals, terrorists and paedophiles." | |
| What a shockingly awful line of argument by this terrible Home Secretary.... 'we need to compromise your privacy and the ability to spy on you all because of paedos and terrorists'. Whenever politicians appeal for something in emotive terms like this I always suspect that they are up to something unpleasant. Using reviled groups to justify restrictions on the liberty of all is what I'd expect of a despotic regime frankly, not a healthy democracy. | |
| It's not just a conspiracy theory if there really is a conspiracy, Theresa. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:15AM | |
| Strange how the minute Theresa May wants something it's about protecting society from paedophiles, not just an insane desire to control everything. | |
| Business requires secure and often secret communications to conduct negotiations and discuss intellectual property etc.. The mere fact that X Co. is exchanging emails with Y Co. can be enough, if disclosed, to ruin a deal, confirm suspicions of a merger or acquisition or facilitate industrial espionage. Now we're going to have an entire nation's worth of data held for months with the usual government ineptitude, accessible only to the most bribe-proof and virtuous few hundred thousand people in quangos up and down the country. What a disaster. Heavily-encrypted, overseas-proxied VPN, here we come. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:16AM | |
| What is wrong with the current system?! I thought that if someone was suspected of criminality, the police can apply for a warrant and then access phone calls, data, ect as it's happening in real time. | |
| Are we all suspected of criminals now then? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:16AM | |
| I feel perfectly safe that no-one would ever dream of abusing anti-terrorism laws to harrass innocent civilians. Oh, hang on... | |
| Here's an example... and another... and another.... and another. | |
| From a selection of hundreds. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:18AM | |
| Theresa May will literally say ANYTHING while keeping a straight face. | |
| I would admire that as some sort of skill if I didnt know that she is actually a cyborg constructed deep beneath Whitehall by Tory scientists. The TM2012 is designed primarily as a propaganda unit whose main weapon is the ability to show no trace of shame whatsoever. Conspiracy theory? You decide. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:19AM | |
| If it's anything like the NHS IT project - it will never work anyway. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:20AM | |
| Is the Labour Party going to oppose this though? | |
| Like the Conservatives in opposition, they will fight it tooth and nail. | |
| Until they get into government. | |
| Then the public sector party, which really governs us, will 'persuade' them of its necessity; nay, an extension of it..... | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:20AM | |
| Think Tom Brake makes a salient point: | |
| He said there was no objection in principle to extending the capability of the police and security services to access communications data from emails, texts and mobile phones to Twitter, Facebook and other social media. But the party wanted assurances that it was technically possible to access the "who sent what to whom, when and where" traffic data without accessing content – a point about which there is much debate. | |
| Is the worry much about accessing content details rather than just having access to the dataset? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:21AM | |
| The government is to offer a blank cheque to internet and phone firms... | |
| Then suddenly the the ISPs and phone firms report the cost for doing this rapidly escalates. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:24AM | |
| I believe this government has ulterior motives and that this is driven by a desire to control. I do not expect this, as with secret courts, will see much opposition from Labour either. Knowledge is power and those at the top crave that more than anything. It might be useful though to depoliticise the issue and avoid party bias and name-calling. Surely the approach we should all consider is that there comes a point when we have to ask whether the risks posed to us - however real they may be - are worth the sacrifice of long established rights and freedoms. Whether we really want to live a life where constraints on our freedoms actually extend beyond what our fore-fathers have fought and died to avoid? In my opinion we are very close to that point. Sometimes the potential risks, however awful they may be, just have to be faced. And actually we British are very good at doing just that. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:24AM | |
| Of course the LibDems will scale back their criticism of a policy they formerly outright opposed. We expect nothing else from them these days. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:25AM | |
| If you have nothing to hide you have plenty to worry about, if you look up some left wing writings or right wing for that matter will you be flagged up? Doing a bit of research will you be signposted as an extremist or a pervert? What about if someone jokingly says lets start a revolution will they have armed police pointing automatics in their face. Branding objectors conspiracy theorists is just May trying to kill the debate the adage if you have nothing to hide has been proven through history to be complete and utter b.s. Scary stuff I think. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:25AM | |
| More seriously...this is a very worrying step towards fascism. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:26AM | |
| So, no more innocent until proven guilty then? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:28AM | |
| Labour will support it. They've repeatedly expressed frustrations about not being able to get some of their surveillance policies into law during the last parliament and they condemned the Conservatives for scrapping ID cards. Now Labour gets to enact one of their dream policies with the Conservatives taking the flak. | |
| So who's going to take bets on long it will before Teresa May dips her toe in the water of an ID card consultation? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:28AM | |
| If May is so thick and stupid that she cannot tell the difference between a conspiracy theorist and someone who is simply concerned about their privacy then she shouldn't be in such a position of power. Thick and stupid people cause enough problems in this world without her adding to them. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:30AM | |
| I am seriously begining to think that when the next election is due that it is not going to happen. Some perfectly "valid" emergency will be cited as a reason, the Government will sadly say that due to world events it is imperative that the election is "shelved" temporarily so that our safety and security can be assured and for us not "to be afraid" about what is happening. After all if we have "nothing to hide, then there is nothing to fear" and the Government is in the best place to decide our futures as it has been for the previous four years. Hows that for a conspiracy theory Mrs May, or is it too much of a far fetched idea for even you to contemplate. I must admit even I find that idea a step too far but then again some members of your cabinet seem to be very confident that you will be re-elected, so many of you talk about what you will do after 2015. What is it going to take before the people of this Country say enough...giving a bottomless pit of money to ISP's to spy on your own citizens...how much money passed under the table for that bright idea. Why is it necessary for such draconian powers to be put in place especially as the security services seem to have all the tools to combat and convict already. What safeguards do the public have that you and your cronies are not going to pick on activist groups that oppose your reforms, or shut down disability support because they are critical of your behaviour and of that of companies you employ. How much more are people going to take???? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:30AM | |
| May's comments were backed by the Metropolitan police commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, who wrote in the Times that the powers could be "a matter of life and death". | |
| Hasn't the wife of a 7/7 bomber gone missing in Pakistan? They couldn't keep tabs on someone as high profile as her but they want sweeping powers to keep tabs on all of us? This is not about preventing terrorism, it's about monitoring and deterring opposition, particularly in a possible near future of social and economic breakdown. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:32AM | |
| And she's telling us we should trust the police not to divulge any sensitive information to the press. The same police that's been paid by tabloids to keep tabs on politicians, celebrities and families that have been victim of a serious crime. | |
| I guess I'm a conspiracy theorist then, because I'm 100% sure they will misuse this law just as anti-terrorists laws have been used by councils for the terrible acts of littering, applying for a school place and putting bins out on the wrong days. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:32AM | |
| The UK has always been run on the principle one bunch of people can be trusted to ask the questions while another group, the population, are there to be questioned. The tendency appears to be wired into what it means to be British. | |
| Radicals tell me the tradition against it - dissent, the William Blakes, John Lennon in his pomp, the sheer bloody-mindedness of the people who fought the last war - will always, ultimately, win through. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:32AM | |
| I work for a defence and security provider so can I just say: WOO HOO! I'm buying a BOAT baby! | |
| It's going to be the new golden age to replace the Iraq market: open ended contracts, fitting up (in all senses of the term) telcos, ISPs and central government with disjointed systems, selling them more systems to bridge the disparate systems, selling them services to actually sift the Picabytes of data, and then at the end of it all, selling encryption and off-shore proxy services to people who don't want to be spied on! | |
| I'll be back later, I'm just off to get the Fortnum and Mason catalogue! | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:34AM | |
| they will not be allowed to access the content of emails, texts, mobile calls and other confidential web use | |
| Oh no ? Phone hacking is illegal but that didn't stop otherwise law-abiding people from ignoring the law. We have no money and because of that, so they say, the poor, disabled and underprivileged have to suffer. But they can conjure up a huge amount of money for this wicked scheme. And it's our money too. Someone needs to stop and ask "Just what sort of a country do we want Britain to be ? " If they don't know, they are incompetent. If they do know, they have got it completely wrong. Have they ever read and understood George Orwell ? He must be spinning in his grave. And they probably want the means to verify that too. The government has decided that our freedom is less important than catching a few criminals. Well our freedom is much much more important than that. This government is dangerous. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:34AM | |
| I'm quite happy to be labelled a conspiracy theorist, better that than accusations of being a Tory. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:40AM | |
| David Davis seems to be one of the few remaining politicians who will consistently stand by their beliefs and uphold the principles that he stands for. | |
| It is a shame the rest of them are very different beasts. | |
| Given the scale of "austerity" cutbacks in essential services which are capable of saving and improving countless lives every day, it is very offensive that the government feels able to provide an "open cheque" for nothing more than pandering to people who are scared of the bogeyman. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:40AM | |
| Are we all suspected of criminals now then? | |
| Yes. | |
| Innocent until proven guilty? But that's so yesterday! | |
| Wonderful isn't it. | |
| Enjoy. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:40AM | |
| As much as I oppose these Draconian proposals at least we can take comfort in the fact that it's technically and organisationally difficult, verging on impossible. Try to log any communication is difficult but unless you can cast a net to wide and so through the whole thing is pointless. You'd have to capture communications from every commercial ISP, from every company, school, college, university. Anyone that runs a mail server in their bedroom. Every telecoms company, every wireless access point. The cost would run into billions and a deployment that would be measured in years. And if you miss a single transaction, anywhere, it's failed. | |
| Remember, we're all suspects now. That's what this legislation says. The law is meant to limit both the enforcers of it as well as its subjects - this government doesn't seem to believe in that. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:43AM | |
| Actually that would probably split the Lib Dems if he made a big play of it, as many will be pretty miffed at having to vote against their own manifesto for something so draconian, yet again. Sadly he won't , Labour won't change their authoritarian stripes. | |
| On the proposals .They say they'll keep every in game chat record ,from FPS to RPG to MMO , how the hell will the manage that? I'd imagine it'll be hugely expensive and unnecessary, as anyone with ill intents will just change the way they communicate. And what lag will doing it introduce? | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:43AM | |
| "Conspiracy theorists"? Here's a theory, Theresa May is a fascist, this Government are fascist, and so have all the other Governments been. | |
| The irony about her quote is that she wants this legislation to combat the conspiracy theories she is being fed about there being millions of evil terrorists and child abusers who are the only people using ISPs to send their evil corrupting secrets (and arent clever enough to use encryption, vpns etc). | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:44AM | |
| Agree entirely. The "if you have nothing to hide" argument has already been rebutted by someone in an interesting and realistic way: | |
| "If you have nothing to hide, you haven't been living your life properly and you ought to be ashamed of yourself." | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| 14 June 2012 10:45AM | |
| If this bill were to be defeated in Parliament, I bet it'd be more down to influential Conservatives like David Davis (he sticks by his word by the sound of things) than the Lib Dem cowards. | |
| The Liberal Democrats are expected to scale back their criticism of the legislation, which is to be published in draft form on Thursday, after Nick Clegg's intervention secured a series of safeguards, including a scrutiny inquiry by MPs and peers that will report by the end of November. | |
| Why am I not surprised by anything that party says or does, anymore? | |
| No doubt Labour will oppose this, but will look like hypocrties doing so considering it was their last stint government which tried to introduce similar measures. | |
| Link to this comment: | |
| Comments on this page are now closed. | |
| Turn autoplay off | |
| Turn autoplay on | |
| Please activate cookies in order to turn autoplay off | |
| Edition: UK | |
| About us | |
| Today's paper | |
| Subscribe | |
| David Davis says internet data tracking powers will be 'incredibly intrusive' as Theresa May brands critics 'conspiracy theorists' | |
| The government is to offer a blank cheque to internet and phone firms that will be required to track everyone's email, Twitter, Facebook and other internet use under legislation to be published on Thursday. | |
| The disclosure means the taxpayer could face an as-yet-unspecified bill running into hundreds of millions of pounds for the "internet snooping scheme". | |
| It came as the former Conservative shadow home secretary, David Davis, accused the home secretary, Theresa May, of proposing an "incredibly intrusive'' scheme that was exactly the same as the proposal David Cameron had attacked when Labour proposed it in office. | |
| May, in turn, branded the scheme's critics "conspiracy theorists", risking an even deeper breach with her own party's libertarian wing over the plan. | |
| The Home Office has confirmed it will foot the bill, thought to run into tens and possibly hundreds of millions, for collecting and storing the extra social media and web browsing records needed to implement the scheme, which critics have dubbed an "online snooper's charter". | |
| Ministers did not put a figure on the cost of the scheme but said it would be far less than the £2bn price tag estimated when Labour put forward a web-tracking scheme based on a central Home Office database in 2006. | |
| The communications data police and intelligence services may seek about an individual under the communications bill includes email addresses and phone numbers of people who have been in contact, when this happened, and where, the details giving the police records of suspects' associates and activities. It will remain the case that they will not be allowed to access the content of emails, texts, mobile calls and other confidential web use without a warrant signed by the home secretary. | |
| The Liberal Democrats are expected to scale back their criticism of the legislation, which is to be published in draft form on Thursday, after Nick Clegg's intervention secured a series of safeguards, including a scrutiny inquiry by MPs and peers that will report by the end of November. | |
| May dismissed critics of the new powers, which will allow police and intelligence services to track Facebook, Twitter, email and other web use, as "conspiracy theorists". She defended the 550,000 individual requests for data each year made by security officials as a vital tool to catch serious criminals and terrorists. | |
| She told the Sun: "I just don't understand why some people might criticise these proposals. I have no doubt conspiracy theorists will come up with some ridiculous claims about how these measures are an infringement of freedom. But without changing the law, the only freedom we would protect is that of criminals, terrorists and paedophiles." | |
| May's comments were backed by the Metropolitan police commissioner, Bernard Hogan-Howe, who wrote in the Times that the powers could be "a matter of life and death". | |
| He said having greater powers to access data was essential to waging a "total war on crime" and that police risked losing the fight against crime unless parliament passed a law enabling them to collect more communications data. | |
| "Put simply, the police need access to this information to keep up with the criminals who bring so much harm to victims and our society." | |
| But the measure is expected to continue to attract fierce criticism from libertarian Conservatives. | |
| Davis said the fact that there were already half a million requests each year from the police and intelligence services showed just how intrusive it was. | |
| "This is exactly the same thing that Labour proposed in 2009. They went from a central database to this and we attacked it fiercely. In fact, David Cameron attacked it," said Davis, referring to a period when the Conservatives were campaigning against the spread of the "surveillance society". | |
| He said serious criminals would quickly find other ways to communicate and the only people it would catch were the innocent and the incompetent. | |
| "It's not content, but it's incredibly intrusive," Davis told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. "If they really want to do things like this – and we all accept they use data to catch criminals – get a warrant. Get a judge to sign a warrant, not the guy at the next desk, not somebody else in the same organisation." | |
| An online petition run by the campaign group 38 Degrees has attracted more than 163,000 signatures under the slogan: "Our civil liberties have taken a battering in recent years from politicians of all backgrounds. Now it's time to for us to push back." | |
| Tom Brake, co-chair of the Lib Dem home affairs committee, said the decision to publish the bill in draft meant there was an opportunity to examine all its aspects before it was voted on in parliament. | |
| He said there was no objection in principle to extending the capability of the police and security services to access communications data from emails, texts and mobile phones to Twitter, Facebook and other social media. But the party wanted assurances that it was technically possible to access the "who sent what to whom, when and where" traffic data without accessing content – a point about which there is much debate. | |
| Brake said the Lib Dems wanted to see the list of state agencies that could not access such personal data without a warrant extended to cover bodies such as the Food Standards Agency. He also wanted to know what proportion of the 550,000 requests for communications data each year successfully contributed to investigations, and whether it was possible to reduce the volume. | |
| The safeguards secured by Clegg include the joint scrutiny committee of MPs and peers, who will hear expert evidence, including from the Home Office, and examine all aspects to ensure the measure is not "rammed through parliament". It has already been quietly agreed that the committee should report by the end of November, implying a timetable that could see the measure on the statute book within 12 months. | |
| It is expected that inquiries into the bill will be mounted by parliament's intelligence and security and home affairs committees before it emerges in its final form. | |
| Other safeguards to be detailed in the draft bill are a "case-by-case" oversight by the interception of the communications surveillance commissioner, the publication of a privacy impact statement, and powers for the information commissioner to ensure the stored data is kept secure then destroyed when the 12-month retention period expires. | |
| Individuals who feel they have been subject to unlawful tracking will be able to complain to a panel of senior judges in the investigatory powers tribunal. | |
| Internet and phone companies are already required to give the police and security services access to the communications data they retain for their own billing and business purposes. But the Home Office states that the rapidly changing nature of the net, including the widespread use of social media that is not billed item by item, means that this power is no longer sufficient for tracking the activities of criminals online. | |
| Officials say 25% of requests for communications data by the police and security agencies can no longer be met. |