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.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/dec/03/snowden-files-guardian-editor-alan-rusbridger-grilled

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
We should look at the content of the Snowden files – not the messenger We should look at the content of the Snowden files – not the messenger
(about 20 hours later)
When I think of terrorists, newspaper editors aren't the first people who spring to mind. Yet today the editor of the Guardian was hauled before the Commons home affairs select committee – of which I am a member – and accused of breaching terrorist law.When I think of terrorists, newspaper editors aren't the first people who spring to mind. Yet today the editor of the Guardian was hauled before the Commons home affairs select committee – of which I am a member – and accused of breaching terrorist law.
Frankly, any such allegation highlights how ludicrously broad these laws are. But even then it is a ludicrous charge. Thanks to the work of Alan Rusbridger's team, key matters of public interest have been raised; and although progress has been slow, it has forced the three UK spy chiefs to appear before an open committee for the first time; a well-attended Westminster Hall debate on our intelligence and security services has taken place; and the government is beginning to think.Frankly, any such allegation highlights how ludicrously broad these laws are. But even then it is a ludicrous charge. Thanks to the work of Alan Rusbridger's team, key matters of public interest have been raised; and although progress has been slow, it has forced the three UK spy chiefs to appear before an open committee for the first time; a well-attended Westminster Hall debate on our intelligence and security services has taken place; and the government is beginning to think.
The Guardian has achieved what politicians and those responsible for oversight failed to do – spark a debate, and for that we should be grateful.The Guardian has achieved what politicians and those responsible for oversight failed to do – spark a debate, and for that we should be grateful.
However, anyone watching the select committee would not have seen the wider issues. Only a tiny amount of time was used to discuss key principles, with some MPs questioning whether the Guardian followed FedEx small print in sending Edward Snowden's files to America, and some astonishing attacks on the Guardian and Rusbridger – who was even asked whether he loved his country. The phrase "shooting the messenger" has never been more appropriate.However, anyone watching the select committee would not have seen the wider issues. Only a tiny amount of time was used to discuss key principles, with some MPs questioning whether the Guardian followed FedEx small print in sending Edward Snowden's files to America, and some astonishing attacks on the Guardian and Rusbridger – who was even asked whether he loved his country. The phrase "shooting the messenger" has never been more appropriate.
Efforts to explain to committee members about the background, and surveillance projects such as Tor, were repeatedly shut down. It seemed that discussing GCHQ-organised family outings to Disneyland was of far more interest to some members. Efforts to explain to committee members about the background, and projects such as those designed to undermine the anonymity software tool Tor, were repeatedly shut down. It seemed that discussing GCHQ-organised family outings to Disneyland was of far more interest to some members.
This was symptomatic of the wider problem: Britain has missed the point. While in America the president has committed himself to a full review of oversight structures, and the UN has launched an investigation into spying practices, in Britain politicians and the press have been distracted by the vehicle, not the content. We should bear in mind that the only real leak has come from the NSA itself, which failed to control what it claims is very sensitive information but was apparently available to hundreds of thousands of people.This was symptomatic of the wider problem: Britain has missed the point. While in America the president has committed himself to a full review of oversight structures, and the UN has launched an investigation into spying practices, in Britain politicians and the press have been distracted by the vehicle, not the content. We should bear in mind that the only real leak has come from the NSA itself, which failed to control what it claims is very sensitive information but was apparently available to hundreds of thousands of people.
We should focus on the wider issues, the core questions of privacy in a digital age. What are the limits of state surveillance? How do we make sure there is proper oversight? We must not let ourselves get caught up in what the Guardian did or did not do.We should focus on the wider issues, the core questions of privacy in a digital age. What are the limits of state surveillance? How do we make sure there is proper oversight? We must not let ourselves get caught up in what the Guardian did or did not do.
Frankly, criminalising the Guardian would be shooting ourselves in the foot, if not the face. In six months the Guardian has published only 26 documents from more than 58,000 pieces received. Would we really have rather seen Snowden upload these directly on to the internet in a WikiLeaks fashion for all and sundry to see and use – unredacted and in raw form? The Guardian has saved the agencies from much greater damage and embarrassment.Frankly, criminalising the Guardian would be shooting ourselves in the foot, if not the face. In six months the Guardian has published only 26 documents from more than 58,000 pieces received. Would we really have rather seen Snowden upload these directly on to the internet in a WikiLeaks fashion for all and sundry to see and use – unredacted and in raw form? The Guardian has saved the agencies from much greater damage and embarrassment.
The information is out there now, and the Guardian was never the only body to receive it, so let us not delude ourselves that this information would never have surfaced. Instead, let us look at what needs to be done now.The information is out there now, and the Guardian was never the only body to receive it, so let us not delude ourselves that this information would never have surfaced. Instead, let us look at what needs to be done now.
I am delighted that the select committee has announced that we will be summoning the witnesses we really ought to be hearing from. We will call Andrew Parker, the head of MI5, to answer in public the real questions about this country's counter-terrorism strategy. The security chiefs have previously refused to come, but now they have accepted that they can be questioned in public they have no excuse not to answer our questions. Otherwise, the suspicion that they will only answer questions from pet parliamentarians will ring even more true.I am delighted that the select committee has announced that we will be summoning the witnesses we really ought to be hearing from. We will call Andrew Parker, the head of MI5, to answer in public the real questions about this country's counter-terrorism strategy. The security chiefs have previously refused to come, but now they have accepted that they can be questioned in public they have no excuse not to answer our questions. Otherwise, the suspicion that they will only answer questions from pet parliamentarians will ring even more true.
We need more change. We need a full review of the legal basis for surveillance, to make sure the law reflects parliament's wishes. We need better oversight, with a well-resourced body such as the US Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, including outside experts and NGOs.We need more change. We need a full review of the legal basis for surveillance, to make sure the law reflects parliament's wishes. We need better oversight, with a well-resourced body such as the US Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, including outside experts and NGOs.
Privacy and security are both important. We must not allow people to claim the only way to get security is by giving up on our privacy. The Guardian has done its bit, and I am pleased it will not be intimidated into stopping. Parliament must now step up.Privacy and security are both important. We must not allow people to claim the only way to get security is by giving up on our privacy. The Guardian has done its bit, and I am pleased it will not be intimidated into stopping. Parliament must now step up.
• This article was amended on 4 December 2013. An editing error resulted in Tor being described in an earlier version as a surveillance project.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.