Mark Gobell
On Gardening Leave
Joined: 24 Jul 2006
Posts: 4529
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 23, 2008 8:03 am Post subject: Local Councils reading your email & phone records |
 |
|
Who would have thought, back in those heady days before 9/11, that an alleged group of terrorists, thousands of miles away in the mountains of Afghanistan could have forced your local council to use CCTV, read your emails and phone records to spy on you?
I thought it was the terrorists who hated our freedoms and wanted to take them away from us?
Caroline Flint, MP for Don Valley and the then Parliamentary Under Secretary of State at the Home Office, said in Parliament in 2003:
| Caroline Flint wrote: | Caroline Flint: We had the consultation exercise so that people could raise their concerns about the issues and we could deal with them. The consultation allowed us to go through, in depth, the reasons why public authorities might need access to communications data.
I hope that I have reassured those engaged in that area—whether they are public authorities, NGOs concerned with civil liberties, individual members of the public, or communications service providers—about how the system will work. I hope also that I was able to scotch some of the myths about the communications data that people will have access to. I reiterate to the Committee that the order is not about the content of telephone calls or emails, but about things such as subscriber lists and traffic data. |
| Quote: | Council surveillance review urged
Councils in England have been urged to review the way they use surveillance powers to investigate suspected crime.
Under laws brought in to help fight terrorism, councils can access phone and e-mail records and use surveillance to detect or stop a criminal offence.
But Local Government Association chairman Sir Simon Milton has written to councils warning overzealous use of the powers could alienate the public.
They should not be used for "trivial offences" such as dog fouling, he adds.
The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), part of the government's anti-terror drive, gave councils the power to use the surveillance and to access phone and e-mail records.
It could be said that perhaps some of the offences being investigated were too trivial to be using surveillance techniques
Sir Simon Milton, LGA chairman
But concerns have been raised about the way some councils have used the powers.
Recent examples include a family in Dorset followed for several weeks to see if they really did live in a school catchment area.
Other uses have included examining rubbish to monitor household waste.
In his letter, Sir Simon said: "Parliament clearly intended that councils should use the new powers, and generally they are being used to respond to residents' complaints about fly tippers, rogue traders and those defrauding the council tax or housing benefit system."
Sir Simon identifies dog fouling and littering as examples of two offences in which the act's powers were not "necessary and proportionate".
'Public concern'
Wyre Council in Lancashire has used hidden cameras to catch people who let their dogs foul public places - an action the chief executive Jim Corey said was justified.
"Certainly the reaction from the local population about the work has been nothing but complimentary," he told BBC Radio 5 Live.
"Dog fouling is at the top of their list in terms of issues they want the council to be tackling on the ground, so I know the public are only too pleased to see us catching people."
But Sir Simon urges councils to use the powers only for complaints about more serious matters.
He told BBC Breakfast: "I don't think councils are abusing their powers, but there have been one or two instances which have attracted public attention and comment where it could be said that perhaps some of the offences being investigated were too trivial to be using surveillance techniques."
He said it was "very important" that councils preserved the power to use surveillance, but warned that misuse could lead to it being lost altogether.
And he suggested that every council should carry out an annual review to gauge the support of the public for its use of the act.
'Change the law'
Figures released by councils under the Freedom of Information Act show that thousands of people have had their telephone and e-mail records accessed.
It is estimated that about 3,000 people have been targeted in the last year, for alleged offences that included dog smuggling, storing petrol without permission and keeping unburied animal carcasses.
A sample of fewer than 10% of councils showed that spying techniques were used 1,343 times.
Civil rights group Liberty has welcomed the new advice but says it wants the government to reform the law, so that only a judge - not a town hall official - can authorise use of the most intrusive powers.
Liberty director Shami Chakrabarti said: "We just hope that central government now follows the Local Government Association lead and really gets a grip on a law that needs to be updated, a law that is ripe for abuse and in particular, a law that doesn't have an important enough role for judges in authorising this kind of intrusive surveillance."
Conservative local government secretary Eric Pickles said there was "real public concern about the threat to privacy and liberty" from the potential misuse of anti-terror laws by councils.
"We need stronger checks and balances against the potential abuse of such powers to protect the rights of law-abiding citizens from Labour's growing surveillance state," he said. |
| Quote: | HAVE YOUR SAY
They brought these laws in to deal with terrorism, but they seem to have been used to spy on dog-walkers. Then they wonder why so many people object to 42 days
David Potts, Grayswood
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 07:32 GMT 08:32 UK
I think this is an extremely dangerous situation. Council officials should not be granted such obscene powers to spy upon people.
I am concerned that they have been so casually awarded the rights to access phone and email records. They are as fallible as anyone with such awesome power and it seems there are no proper checks in place. We have less freedom to even breathe unobserved in the UK than under any of the old communist regimes. Bar codes on our foreheads next?
[sharpshooter1], Sandhurst, United Kingdom
Recommended by 11 people
Sign in to recommend comments
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:13 GMT 07:13 UK
It is a pity they don't use the powers to snoop on potholes in the road and get them fixed.
Unbelievable, that this amount of power be put in the hands of petty minded town hall officials. Leave the defence of the realm to the police and the forces, and switch this ridiculous law off.
[InTheNameofSanity], London, United Kingdom
Recommended by 34 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:13 GMT 07:13 UK
This is an astonishing example of how powers brought in to deal with terrorism can be extended to cover the most mundane aspects of daily life. It should serve as a check against any complacency on ID cards. The Government says that the vast amount of information the ID card database will make available will be used to counter terrorism, but do not recognise that any future government may take a different view of things and put hte information to more intrusive uses.
David, Bristol
Recommended by 33 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:13 GMT 07:13 UK
Sadly it is too late as democracy is being eroded by so caled conviction politicians with psychologically flawed PC beliefs synomymous with a sick 'holier than thou' Puritanism but no real 'principles' and as Orwell predicted it is only a matter of time before this self righteous elite becomes the 'inner party' with special privileges to turn off their telescreens etc, whilst the rest of us serve the State and learn to control our facial expressions lest we be arrested for thought crime.
TONY PEARCE, CATERHAM, United Kingdom
Recommended by 24 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:12 GMT 07:12 UK
Scary. I'm currently drinking a cup of tea from my George Orwell mug at the present. And yes, the title is Nineteen Eighty-Four.
Jaundiced Eye, Sidcup, United Kingdom
Recommended by 7 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:11 GMT 07:11 UK
This is clearly an abuse of power. A lot of CCTV evidence gets thrown out of a criminal court so howcome they can successfully use it to prosecute motorists and dog walkers.
Local councils are now constantly thinking of new ways in which to rob the public. It is they that should be held to account for the mis use of our funds. I do not want my hard earned CT money wasted on this the technology of the voyeur. After all it is our money and they should never forget that.
Dr Dallas Donovan, Didsbury
Recommended by 22 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:10 GMT 07:10 UK
I lived in Zimbabwe for 48 years and I think people who break the law don't have any rights. If its against the law to let your dog foul then if you get caught because you were spotted on camera then so what? I love being safe in England and have nothing to hide from the 'big brother'!
Fiona Rorbye, Wells
Recommended by 2 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:10 GMT 07:10 UK
I beg to wonder why a street in a certain seaside town in North Yorkshirehas a surveilance camera on every street corner, and I mean every corner, I think theres more camera's here than in the seafront and shops area alone. So just ask you why they are there. When a relative of your has been mugged and the culprit has been identified because of these you wont be complaining then will you, or will you be moaning that there was no camera's.
andrew, sheffield
Recommended by 2 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:10 GMT 07:10 UK
I am concerned about the quality of the people carrying out the surveillance. Since I am more honest, more capable and less corruptible than most councillors (and less subject to fraud caused by gross indebtedbness), I think perhaps I should be spying on them - say, to make sure they pay their parking fines and council tax, and are not on the fiddle, I'm afraid I don't care to be spied upon and lectured, possibly prosecuted, by a bunch of deadbeats.
Helen Lynley, Cheltenham
Recommended by 17 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:10 GMT 07:10 UK
I work for a large engineering company - we are out on the road all day in single occupancy vans - no passengers allowed. A colleague of mine stopped to have lunch in his vehicle at a layby in a torrential downpour, after eating he lit up a ciggie.
Surprise, Surprise next day he is called into managers office as the local council have sent in a photograph taken on a telescopic lens capturing the "offence".
This country is a joke - terrorists walk free.
Brendan Olear
Recommended by 27 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:09 GMT 07:09 UK
I believe so but I don't have the time or the luxury to check all the time.
billy gionis, london, United Kingdom
Recommended by 0 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:09 GMT 07:09 UK
Give a bureaucrat an inch and they'll take a mile - it's the nature of the beast. They will always justify it as being in the public interest. And they do need other revenue streams to pay for their burgeoning pension funds!
[elfandsafetypro]
Recommended by 13 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:09 GMT 07:09 UK
pets foul public spaces and litter are all offences. If we did not use CCTV how else would it be possible to catch these offenders. By limiting the use of CCTV this will send a message that 'low level crime' is OK. Then the next thing will be not to use CCTV for shop lifting, mugging.
Gordon King, Maidstone
Recommended by 3 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:07 GMT 07:07 UK
I believe that Dog Fouling IS a serious crime and it is wrong to imply that this is a trivial offence. My children have to walk and play in these public areas and the CCTV should act as a deterent to people who allow their dogs to participate in this disgusting crime. I object to the BBC trivialising this. If a crime is committed then people should be prosecuted, if no crime is being committed, then what have people to fear? Please read this e-mail out as Dog Fouling is most disgusting.
Douggie Sorley, Chorley
Recommended by 5 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:07 GMT 07:07 UK
If any council employee suspects a local resdient of terrorism, they should do what we ALL should do and report it to the local police and let THEM handle it!
Councils have, in recent years forgotten what their role is, that is serving the local community. Councils now are so dictatorial to the point that it makes one wonder what their agenda is.
No council should have the right to snoop on ANYONE. We have professionals quite capable of doing that!
Gerupta Singh
Recommended by 15 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:06 GMT 07:06 UK
Orwell's fiction is more becoming fact by the day! ID cards next!
John Fitzgerald, Boston, United Kingdom
Recommended by 5 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:04 GMT 07:04 UK
Incredible,I strongly dis agree with giving Councils such powers,the Police seem to get it wrong quite often but allowing Council workers
to snoop would really end yet another of our 'freedoms'.
ian mearns, Tomatin,inverness-shire
Recommended by 6 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:03 GMT 07:03 UK
None of this surprises me - this country is falling apart at the seams - virtually no aspect of life appears to be degraded, including our privacy.
Our lives are so impacted by this softly-softly approach to Orwellian misery.
Most of our population cannot even afford to buy their own homes, feed themselves and power utilities are ripping us off en masse whilst profiting beyond obscenity.
It will end one day, I just do not know how....
Dave Smith
Recommended by 3 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:03 GMT 07:03 UK
a councilor never sleeps when their not exposing bin fraud or going into deep cover to catch those evil dog doings do'ers they are fighting global terrorism wow sign me up!!!!
ferret pimp, United Kingdom of Great Britain and N Ireland
Recommended by 2 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:03 GMT 07:03 UK
Nu Labour are totally responsible for introducing laws that gave councils the right to invade the privacy of citizens of this country. It was very obvious to all but Nu Labour that this abuse would take place. They have the ability through Parliament to stop it . But this will not happen, instead there is the usual insipid response. Stalin would have been proud of this government.
norman hall
Recommended by 7 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:01 GMT 07:01 UK
I beleive the problem is that WHO is accountable to using this information when its abused. In the case of spying on the family who in the upper echelons decided to spy on them.
I personally believe that before any suspect that is spied on someone in the council or local government should have to sign a peice of paper with the details of the alleged criminal intent before its started.
If it then goes to court there is someone who takes the blame. This should prevent abuse.
andrew g, chesterfield
Recommended by 2 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 06:01 GMT 07:01 UK
Many councils are utterly incompetent and cannot even carry out their basic tasks and roles.
Why should we entrust them with these powers which they are not fit or competent to use?
Don't forget, proposals now exist to give them tax raising powers. That means the same people trawling through your bank statements and tax records.
We should stop the rot now before NuLab prove the man right. "Man is born free, but everywhere he is in chains."
Doug Trendle, Fatty Towers
Recommended by 10 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:56 GMT 06:56 UK
These cameras are supposed to be used in the fight against terrorism but apparently are being used for any whimsical scheme the local council think fit. This is plainly an abuse of the rules and a misuse of public money. As such this can be construed as fraud and the police should investigate and prosecute those people found to be responsible. Whilst they are at it and to demonstrate nobody is above the law all MP's found fiddling their expenses should be taken to task also.
liteknight, peterborough
Recommended by 5 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:53 GMT 06:53 UK
Of course.
When the RIPA powers were introduced, the law was badly written and open to abuse.
Caroline Flint gave assurances in 2003 that these laws would not be missused. Unfortunately her bolt-on attempts to placate us have proved to be worthless. The powers have been misused.
The law should be rewritten so that these powers are used only for national security interests and serious crime, as intended.
The government should then take a long hard look at the 42 day detention law.
Doug Trendle, Fatty Towers
Recommended by 8 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:52 GMT 06:52 UK
Most of the people living in the UK are too brain dead to even care, or actively support further moves toward a police state so I guess the answer is 'no'. Just don't go crying human rights when you become the victim of injustice because we're all responsible for the situation we've got into now.
Rufus McDufus, Twickenham, United Kingdom
Recommended by 7 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:50 GMT 06:50 UK
its not about does the council have powers ,its more to do with how they enforce the powers & the quality of evidence they have to justify there actions ,thats where many councils fall down . The public however seem to on the one hand to want value for money from there council ,but where the council identify a person or persons who are costing other council tax payers money via various means ,there is uproar when the council takes action . The public either want a proactive council or they dont
Peter Burrows, Dunstable
Recommended by 0 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:50 GMT 06:50 UK
The council here are always wanting people to use email or 'phone to communicate with them. Never do it; it makes it easy for them to monitor your activity. Going ex-directory is also a good idea.
Vic, Hereford
Recommended by 2 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:48 GMT 06:48 UK
Maliciuos neighbours have been reported me to everyone, DHSS don't even claim, tax office, & Council. These neighbours have laughed that I have been followed by the Council motorcycle, that they can do this. Stoke is one of the poorest areas & they should not be wasted money on neighbours whims. If they have surveillance powers it should be used on rare cases of muslim extremists, the majority of muslims are well intergated. l I think councils & police shouldn't do this leave it to expert depts
ruth, stoke-on-trent
Recommended by 1 person
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:47 GMT 06:47 UK
Its too late I am afraid we are now a nation of voyeurs - hence the popularity of such nonsense as Big Brother and similar rubbish.
Yesterday morning (Sunday) at 10 am a policeman turned up at my house.
Why had my car had been seen at 10.30am on Saturday in a layby in the country (with me sitting it).
I had been seen by a stupid female 'Hooray Henry' on a horse who had reported me as a potential horse thief - rather than a man stopped in a layby having a smoke (for 4 minutes).
Paranoia?
bernie, harrogate
Recommended by 6 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:46 GMT 06:46 UK
I think local councils have far to much power as it is, long ago they used to just provide services to the communities, now it seems they are controlling the community.
I can understand their use of surveillance in nuisance residence issues and criminal cases, but they seem to have no restrictions on what they can do and are now abusing the trust we have in them. I think the time has come to curb their powers full stop,
Chris Ronan, Wirral, United Kingdom
Recommended by 6 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:43 GMT 06:43 UK
How very frightening it is to see Orwell's "1984" coming to life.
This is not what our precious hard earned public money should be spent on !
Betty Burns, Salisbury, United Kingdom
Recommended by 3 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:42 GMT 06:42 UK
This is just a good example of Political Correctness and mostly Health & Safety. They use these CCTV cameras to spy upon us. It would make me feel better if by every CCTV camera, that there was a screen so that we could see the people watching us! Where is the government coming to?
Joe, Brighton, UK
Recommended by 0 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:42 GMT 06:42 UK
Local councils are filled with people who delight in the pettyness of regulation. to give these officals any sort of snooping powers, and then expecting them not to use them is asking for trouble
Neil Edwards, King's Lynn
Recommended by 8 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:41 GMT 06:41 UK
We are a devious lot so councils need to be able to snoop if they want to. I cant stand dog owners who let their dogs foul and leave it for my kids to find. Film the lot of them and slap a fine on them. Better still make them do community service in my local park picking up dog mess.
[KAOwen], Bristol, United Kingdom
Recommended by 1 person
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:39 GMT 06:39 UK
There are more important things the authorities should be checking up on like, benefit / insurance fraudsters and I include all those public sector workers pensioned off early at great expense on grounds of health reasons which are often dubious.
Ian Baildon, Bradford, United Kingdom
Recommended by 13 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:39 GMT 06:39 UK
The great unelected mass of "local government" is the greatest threat to democracy in this country and now they have snooping powers being misused on a daily basis by people who might best be described as "industry's rejects" and at worst psychologically unfit to wield any responsability greater than being able to put their shoes and socks on of a morning.
Keith Halewood, Tonbridge
Recommended by 4 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:38 GMT 06:38 UK
I suspect huge numbers of households occupied by more than one person are pretending to be single person households in order to receive a 25% discount on their council tax.
Council powers should be INCREASED (not reduced) in order to root this practice out. Otherwise the rest of us are paying their bill for them.
Colin, London
Recommended by 0 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:37 GMT 06:37 UK
More CCTV is ok, but No to spying on emails and phone calls.
George Turk, St Albans
Recommended by 0 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:33 GMT 06:33 UK
Snooping of any sort should carry a mandatory jail sentence. The sentence should be double for public officials caught snooping and their entire (exorbitant) pension should be forfeit. Let us not be fooled by this terrorist nonsense; this government brought in these laws precisely to promote and increase snooping in their quest to 'know everything about everybody' (Blunkett Quote). Civilisation is directly proportional to the level of privacy guaranteed by law.
Fred Hause, London
Recommended by 3 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:25 GMT 06:25 UK
This power should only be used where there is suspicion of terrorism not where some official worries about a possible offence against a minor law. It is not appropriate for this sort of case and should never have been used. One wonders how it would fare under Human Rights legislation - oh, sorry forgot, this was the indigenous working population to whom those rights do not belong!
[recrec]
Recommended by 5 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:23 GMT 06:23 UK
councils should have no powers of surveillance, that is what the police are for,councils should get their primary role sorted out before trying to get more power, just to remind them that is to provide services in the most value for money manner that is possible , not as is the situation now where most councils could not organise a good party in a brewery that had a free beer sign out side the door
ronnie, glasgow
Recommended by 20 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:17 GMT 06:17 UK
"Should council snooping powers be changed?"
What a mess this country has become. I have become paranoid as I wonder how far these people will go. It's not good having a paranoid population.
Louise Roche, Ex-pat at last!
Recommended by 4 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:14 GMT 06:14 UK
What would be more beneficial is for tax-payers to set up CCTV to spy on councilors to see where our council tax is being used!
Some councils cannot be bothered to collect rubbish once a week - do the Government honestly expect them to fight Terrorism!
[Star-boy], Somewhere between boredom and sexual frustration, United Kingdom
Recommended by 43 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:13 GMT 06:13 UK
They brought thes laws in to deal with terrorism, but they seem to have been used to spy on dog-walkers.
Then they wonder why so many people object to 42 days
David Potts, Grayswood, United Kingdom
They didn't though did they? Although thy will when they get thrown in jail for no particular reason and not even charged.
Why bother, does anyone know what happened in Big Brother or the latest celeb gossip? (puts brain back into neutral)
Conan Hayes, London
Recommended by 8 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:11 GMT 06:11 UK
Too late. Nulabour are already turning this country into a police state.
If you don't like being spied on, this is about the last country on Earth you should be living in. Nulabour see everything you earn as being theirs, and feel they should know everything you do.
Get used to it.
Steve Butler, Basingstoke, United Kingdom
Recommended by 30 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:11 GMT 06:11 UK
Near here, on two separate occasions, CCTV witnessed violent thugs attacking totally innocent victims. The thugs were identified and the CCTV evidence led to convictions, resulting in jail sentences.
If the cameras weren't there, the thugs would have got away with their crime, and if anyone thinks that instead of cameras there should be police waiting on every corner of every street just in case, you're living in cloud cuckoo land.
Curbing powers will only make life better for criminals.
Llew G, Newbury, United Kingdom
Recommended by 1 person
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:11 GMT 06:11 UK
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety"
Benjamin Franklin
1755
mustafa bin jokin
Recommended by 30 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:03 GMT 06:03 UK
This just shows councils will abuse peoples privacy with total disregard and use anythng to spy on council tax payers using equipment that was installed to fight crime and terrorism.
Whats next watching how much rubbish you put in your bins or how many times you go out of your house.
Stinks of big brother is watching.
[wizmyrddin], The Looney Bin, United Kingdom
Recommended by 3 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:02 GMT 06:02 UK
Ideally this government would like to put surveillance cameras into your home ....or into the TV so you don't know your being spied on.
W Fletcher, Fareham
Recommended by 5 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 05:02 GMT 06:02 UK
If these powers exist to combat terrorism, why are councils using them to check on school catchment areas and dog mess?
A bit of dog poo on a stick waved around in a crowded place can cause mass panic, but it's not really terrorism in the same sense as the law means.
bob bobwell, Dubai
Recommended by 1 person
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 04:54 GMT 05:54 UK
They brought thes laws in to deal with terrorism, but they seem to have been used to spy on dog-walkers.
Then they wonder why so many people object to 42 days
David Potts, Grayswood, United Kingdom
Recommended by 33 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 04:53 GMT 05:53 UK
I fully support CCTV surveillance. We need more of it.
However, I cannot see justification for spying on emails and phone calls.
Mustafa Yorumcu, London
Recommended by 6 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 04:34 GMT 05:34 UK
Under laws brought in to help fight terrorism, councils can access phone and e-mail records and use surveillance to detect or stop a criminal offence.
isnt this what the police are meant to do?
I think its an infringment of my privacy for people to be accessing all the above espcially phone calls, text and internet usage!
I think these people should spend as much time watching what exactly the government is doing ie mis spending their expenses etc that would make me feel a bit safer!!!
[midnightJoanne], Lincs, United Kingdom
Recommended by 21 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 04:32 GMT 05:32 UK
Yes they should be curbed.
Surveillance used to follow, watch and track a couple who owned two houses merely because they might have moved to secure a place for their child at a better school was proved unfounded is wrong.
Allowing staff to sift through people's rubbish to identify what people discard is wrong.
Keeping fines for parking penaltues that were illegally issued is wrong.
Who is to say what a Council may think is a 'crime' and they don't spy on you next for this 'crime'.
[Menedemus], Cambridge, ENGLAND
Recommended by 7 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 04:31 GMT 05:31 UK
No
In the end of the day, if the powers are being used to catch people who are breaking the law or cheating the rest of us, why not
It is the same story - use cameras to catch other people fighting or being anti social to my car, garden etc but how dare the nanny state use them to catch me speeding or doing something that I want to do.
Ban them all or get used to it.
If you do ban them all, feel free to explain why to a mugged pensioner or the parents of a run down child.
[common-tatter], London, United Kingdom
Recommended by 0 people
Added: Monday, 23 June, 2008, 04:18 GMT 05:18 UK
Sorry? Access to phone and email records by my council? What? You mean arbitrary access at will without judge’s permission? When did this happen?
Backdoor legislation introduced by a backdoor ‘government’; why does this have echoes of the old East Germany?
Don’t worry though, sheeple, there is nothing to worry about; they are here to protect us, aren’t they? All of their intentions are honourable. We have nothing to fear!
I am bereft of further comment; what have THEY done to this country?
Steve B, Wilts, United Kingdom
Recommended by 51 people |
http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?sortBy=1&forumID=4991&star t=45&tstart=0&edition=1&ttl=20080623090040#paginator
_________________
The Medium is the Massage - Marshall McLuhan. |
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
