wew uk politics, not gonna regret this one
- Thread starter Aether
- Start date
Stalker
the very best rp man on planet earth
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 4,060
- Nebulae
- 12,168
I've honestly never really cared who/what is watching what I do online unless it involves my bank details and any other secure documents and such.
I find the large majority of people who complain about this sort of stuff do it because they're doing dodgy shit to begin with, not defending the bill just, putting my two cents in.
I find the large majority of people who complain about this sort of stuff do it because they're doing dodgy shit to begin with, not defending the bill just, putting my two cents in.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 5,720
- Nebulae
- 4,501
Not really, a lot of people can see how this can EASILY spiral out of control and into something profitable and that's why some people don't want it.
Koch
Time to dance
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 479
- Nebulae
- 570
People here overestimate the technological advancements so far, turning something like this on would quite literally choke most ISPs to death. Take it from someone who works for a company with 15000 users that has a firewall worth $150 000 USD that struggles to log everything. Especially if they want correlation of traffic to a user, it's an insane amount of data processing.
Saggy
Electron
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 642
- Nebulae
- 1,019
Wew look, response is in
Thoughts?
Over 100,000 signed (almost 150,000 now) so may be a debate on it as well.
The Investigatory Powers Act dramatically increases transparency around the use of investigatory powers. It protects both privacy and security and underwent unprecedented scrutiny before becoming law.
The Government is clear that, at a time of heightened security threat, it is essential our law enforcement, security and intelligence services have the powers they need to keep people safe.
The Investigatory Powers Act transforms the law relating to the use and oversight of Investigatory powers. It strengthens safeguards and introduces world-leading oversight arrangements.
The Act does three key things. First, it brings together powers already available to law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies to obtain communications and data about communications. It makes these powers – and the safeguards that apply to them – clear and understandable.
Second, it radically overhauls the way these powers are authorised and overseen. It introduces a ‘double-lock’ for the most intrusive powers, including interception and all of the bulk capabilities, so warrants require the approval of a Judicial Commissioner. And it creates a powerful new Investigatory Powers Commissioner to oversee how these powers are used.
Third, it ensures powers are fit for the digital age. The Act makes a single new provision for the retention of internet connection records in order for law enforcement to identify the communications service to which a device has connected. This will restore capabilities that have been lost as a result of changes in the way people communicate.
Public scrutiny
The Bill was subject to unprecedented scrutiny prior to and during its passage.
The Bill responded to three independent reports: by David Anderson QC, the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation; by the Royal United Services Institute’s Independent Surveillance Review Panel; and by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. All three of those authoritative independent reports agreed a new law was needed.
The Government responded to the recommendations of those reports in the form of a draft Bill, published in November 2015. That draft Bill was submitted for pre-legislative scrutiny by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. The Intelligence and Security Committee and the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee conducted parallel scrutiny. Between them, those Committees received over 1,500 pages of written submissions and heard oral evidence from the Government, industry, civil liberties groups and many others. The recommendations made by those Committees informed changes to the Bill and the publication of further supporting material.
A revised Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 1 March, and completed its passage on 16 November, meeting the timetable for legislation set by Parliament during the passage of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014. Over 1,700 amendments to the Bill were tabled and debated during this time.
The Government has adopted an open and consultative approach throughout the passage of this legislation, tabling or accepting a significant number of amendments in both Houses of Parliament in order to improve transparency and strengthen privacy protections. These included enhanced protections for trade unions and journalistic and legally privileged material, and the introduction of a threshold to ensure internet connection records cannot be used to investigate minor crimes.
Privacy and Oversight
The Government has placed privacy at the heart of the Investigatory Powers Act. The Act makes clear the extent to which investigatory powers may be used and the strict safeguards that apply in order to maintain privacy.
A new overarching ‘privacy clause’ was added to make absolutely clear that the protection of privacy is at the heart of this legislation. This privacy clause ensures that in each and every case a public authority must consider whether less intrusive means could be used, and must have regard to human rights and the particular sensitivity of certain information. The powers can only be exercised when it is necessary and proportionate to do so, and the Act includes tough sanctions – including the creation of new criminal offences – for those misusing the powers.
The safeguards in this Act reflect the UK’s international reputation for protecting human rights. The unprecedented transparency and the new safeguards – including the ‘double lock’ for the most sensitive powers – set an international benchmark for how the law can protect both privacy and security.
Home Office
The Government is clear that, at a time of heightened security threat, it is essential our law enforcement, security and intelligence services have the powers they need to keep people safe.
The Investigatory Powers Act transforms the law relating to the use and oversight of Investigatory powers. It strengthens safeguards and introduces world-leading oversight arrangements.
The Act does three key things. First, it brings together powers already available to law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies to obtain communications and data about communications. It makes these powers – and the safeguards that apply to them – clear and understandable.
Second, it radically overhauls the way these powers are authorised and overseen. It introduces a ‘double-lock’ for the most intrusive powers, including interception and all of the bulk capabilities, so warrants require the approval of a Judicial Commissioner. And it creates a powerful new Investigatory Powers Commissioner to oversee how these powers are used.
Third, it ensures powers are fit for the digital age. The Act makes a single new provision for the retention of internet connection records in order for law enforcement to identify the communications service to which a device has connected. This will restore capabilities that have been lost as a result of changes in the way people communicate.
Public scrutiny
The Bill was subject to unprecedented scrutiny prior to and during its passage.
The Bill responded to three independent reports: by David Anderson QC, the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation; by the Royal United Services Institute’s Independent Surveillance Review Panel; and by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. All three of those authoritative independent reports agreed a new law was needed.
The Government responded to the recommendations of those reports in the form of a draft Bill, published in November 2015. That draft Bill was submitted for pre-legislative scrutiny by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. The Intelligence and Security Committee and the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee conducted parallel scrutiny. Between them, those Committees received over 1,500 pages of written submissions and heard oral evidence from the Government, industry, civil liberties groups and many others. The recommendations made by those Committees informed changes to the Bill and the publication of further supporting material.
A revised Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 1 March, and completed its passage on 16 November, meeting the timetable for legislation set by Parliament during the passage of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014. Over 1,700 amendments to the Bill were tabled and debated during this time.
The Government has adopted an open and consultative approach throughout the passage of this legislation, tabling or accepting a significant number of amendments in both Houses of Parliament in order to improve transparency and strengthen privacy protections. These included enhanced protections for trade unions and journalistic and legally privileged material, and the introduction of a threshold to ensure internet connection records cannot be used to investigate minor crimes.
Privacy and Oversight
The Government has placed privacy at the heart of the Investigatory Powers Act. The Act makes clear the extent to which investigatory powers may be used and the strict safeguards that apply in order to maintain privacy.
A new overarching ‘privacy clause’ was added to make absolutely clear that the protection of privacy is at the heart of this legislation. This privacy clause ensures that in each and every case a public authority must consider whether less intrusive means could be used, and must have regard to human rights and the particular sensitivity of certain information. The powers can only be exercised when it is necessary and proportionate to do so, and the Act includes tough sanctions – including the creation of new criminal offences – for those misusing the powers.
The safeguards in this Act reflect the UK’s international reputation for protecting human rights. The unprecedented transparency and the new safeguards – including the ‘double lock’ for the most sensitive powers – set an international benchmark for how the law can protect both privacy and security.
Home Office
Thoughts?
Over 100,000 signed (almost 150,000 now) so may be a debate on it as well.
Zak
Resident xenophile
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 5,887
- Nebulae
- 16,124
it's not so much this bill specifically (although i think it shouldn't be passed), but more of what it can lead to
setting a precedent for sacrificing liberty for security is very, very bad
part of the reason i loved the original mirror's edge so much is that it had a similar kind of scenario: observation and surveillance gradually increased, and by the time people realized what was going on it was too late to stop it
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 14,399
- Nebulae
- 49,104
Cant we just have a centre-left liberal party with free healthcare and education subsidised by reasonable tax rates that has a right-wing view of economics, justice and immigration and a zero tolerance outlook social welfare abuse? No?
I'll make it then. We'll call it the Common Sense party
I'll make it then. We'll call it the Common Sense party
Reactions:
List
Gabby
Atom
- Joined
- May 28, 2016
- Messages
- 3,242
- Nebulae
- 3,238
GenericPlayer
i like firetruck and moster truck
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2016
- Messages
- 12,315
- Nebulae
- 55,482
Moon
Quark
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2016
- Messages
- 61
- Nebulae
- 49
can't say i was too politically involved back then but i struggle to imagine the lib dems then being anything other than completely useless
the nhs must be destroyed
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 25,709
- Nebulae
- 110,665
They basically forced the conservatives into a coalition.
Needless to say, it ended poorly. Because Tories and Dems don't mix that well.
Reactions:
List
GenericPlayer
i like firetruck and moster truck
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2016
- Messages
- 12,315
- Nebulae
- 55,482
Moon
Quark
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2016
- Messages
- 61
- Nebulae
- 49
probably doesn't help, especially since a lot of people love the nhs. i'd wager quite a lot of it is poorly justified though. personally i prefer the idea of health insurance - quite ironically (i'll admit) i see it as being fairer than public healthcare barring a few exceptions. haven't really looked into it recently or in depth but i broadly recall the nhs performing poorly, increasing the budget seems like the only solution
i'm assuming they didn't really do much. they really got smashed in the last general election
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 25,709
- Nebulae
- 110,665
Can be basically summarized with
Cameron and Clegg sat and ate biscuits in No.10 while their government had to compromise on shit.
In all seriousness, it wasn't ideal at all.
Reactions:
List
GenericPlayer
i like firetruck and moster truck
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2016
- Messages
- 12,315
- Nebulae
- 55,482
The NHS is performing poorly due to multiple budget cuts made by the Conservative Party (With Jeremy Hunt being the health secretary). If that didn't happen, it'd be performing rather well right now, which considering the circumstances, it already is. Whereas health insurance only really works for people who are already wealthy enough to afford it, it simply isn't viable.
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2016
- Messages
- 25,709
- Nebulae
- 110,665
It's funny because if Labour had played their cards right, they'd have had an easy win against the Tories given how they've been performing. At least in my opinion; Cameron's government did a lot of stupid shit.
But you know, it's hard when the party is split between Comrade Corbyn and people like Blair.
GenericPlayer
i like firetruck and moster truck
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2016
- Messages
- 12,315
- Nebulae
- 55,482
Spicy meme.
But as it stands, it seems like most of the people who are registered into the Labour Party support Corbyn, whereas actual MPs are leaning towards Blair's line of thinking. In the current system, it's likely Labour won't be able to continue as easily as they did before without becoming Conservatives, but with the colour red.
But then again, all the Blairites are leaving so, crisis averted?