Tech & Biz

House of Lords: Too Much Gov't Spying in UK

by Jordan Yerman | February 5, 2009 at 07:54 am

192 views | 45 Recommendations | 8 comments

Update: The House of Lords has stated that there is indeed too much spying on private citizens.

"Every time we make a telephone call, send an email, browse the internet, or even walk down our local high street, our actions may be monitored and recorded," the report said.

Goodlad said in a statement: "There can be no justification for this gradual but incessant creep towards every detail about us being recorded and pored over by the state."

As Britain evolves as a surveillance society, finally some gesture is being made regarding how a citizen's right to privacy is defined.

Last time I was in London (a few months ago), I was surprised just how many cameras I saw (and that saw me)- even more than I had imagined.

And, yes, I gave them the finger when it seemed appropriate*.

Historically, the UK has not had a law of privacy, but one has emerged in recent years that has combined confidentiality laws covering the exchange of information with human rights laws protecting the right to a private life.

Courts have ruled in several cases that the publication of information violates these laws, and these judgments will form the basis of future rulings.

The "law", if it can even be called such, is a duct-tape-and-toothpick construction resulting from court decisions, rather than a proper law with specific parameters.

Meanwhile, remember those ID cards? Funny enough, they're unreadable. By anyone.

The first UK ID cards have already been issued - but no UK police officers or border guards have any way of reading the data stored on them.

Currently no police stations, border entry points or job centres have readers for the card's biometric chip, the Identity and Passport Service (IPS) revealed in response to an FoI (Freedom of Information) request by silicon.com about the £4.7bn identity cards scheme.

With cops and border guards unable to use the cards to check a person's identity, critics are calling the £4.7bn scheme 'farcical' and a 'waste of time.'"

(* Appropriate = when I felt like it)

0 See all footage | View Slideshow

Share: email story | add to any | | facebook | stumbleupon

recommend This comment thread is now closed

Jordan Yerman

at 08:01 on February 5th, 2009

I know everyone has snapped this same photo, but hey.

jordan has contributed a photo to this story.

car1edb

at 11:34 on February 5th, 2009

yup... the UK populus is one of the most watched on the planet, also acts as a good testbed for other places being nice and compact.

this act comes into force soon also, which falls under the "counter terrorism" blanket as most things these days.

“Taking photos of police officers could be considered a crime

The relationship between photographers and police could worsen next month when new laws are introduced that allow for the arrest and imprisonment of anyone who takes pictures of officers ‘likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’.”

I got questioned about snapping some arty shots of gov offices/skyscrapers over there once, I didn't really want to push it as the guy did have a machine gun and I probably looked like a homegrown ;)

dowdinsk

at 13:58 on February 5th, 2009

precisely...

Iffy (not verified)

at 15:25 on February 5th, 2009

The UK gov openly stores every piece of data on people - their travels via mobile phone and Oyster cards (subway) - CCTV, employment history, web searches, security databases etc. And then shares it with people's employers. You have no rights.

Paschen

at 15:58 on February 5th, 2009

(* Appropriate = when I felt like it)Not a bad definition at all, or philosophy for that matter. Considering the subject of Privacy laws and Cameras be on once imagination.