News (Media Awareness Project) - UK: PUB LTE: Extension Of Powers Is Unjustifiable |
Title: | UK: PUB LTE: Extension Of Powers Is Unjustifiable |
Published On: | 2002-06-13 |
Source: | Daily Telegraph (UK) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-23 05:07:18 |
EXTENSION OF POWERS IS UNJUSTIFIABLE
SIR - I am no stranger to the need for accurate, timely and verifiable
intelligence, having served 19 years in a branch of the Services concerned
with military intelligence and afterwards working on IT systems involved
with criminal and similar intelligence.
The extensions proposed by the Government to the Regulation of
Investigatory Powers Act are unjustifiable. The sort of intelligence that
can be obtained from when and where phone calls have been made, e-mail
exchanges, and which computer sites have been visited (loosely defined as
traffic analysis) should not, and must not, be available to the
organisations the Government wishes to extend it to. There is absolutely no
reason why the Food Standards Agency, local authorities or any of the other
proposed bodies need access to this type of information.
Any necessary investigations must be carried out by the police or other
agencies that the Act already covers. The thought that a local authority,
in particular, will obtain this sort of information is very frightening.
Local authority staff do not receive the same level of security clearance
and vetting as current users of this information and the opportunity for
corruption is unlimited. Secondly, the all-encompassing reasons for
obtaining such information mean that it would be open to abuse for
political ends.
This Government has proved that it cannot be trusted with even the most
basic information about individuals. Who knows what injustices and
persecutions will follow when a politically motivated local council obtains
information about individuals and groups with which it disagrees.
I have always justified the collection of intelligence about individuals on
the ground that it is handled by, in the main, apolitical, cleared and
vetted individuals with a need to know. I am no longer convinced that this
is the case. This Act must be repealed, not extended.
From:
Ian Coghlan, Lydney, Glos
SIR - I am no stranger to the need for accurate, timely and verifiable
intelligence, having served 19 years in a branch of the Services concerned
with military intelligence and afterwards working on IT systems involved
with criminal and similar intelligence.
The extensions proposed by the Government to the Regulation of
Investigatory Powers Act are unjustifiable. The sort of intelligence that
can be obtained from when and where phone calls have been made, e-mail
exchanges, and which computer sites have been visited (loosely defined as
traffic analysis) should not, and must not, be available to the
organisations the Government wishes to extend it to. There is absolutely no
reason why the Food Standards Agency, local authorities or any of the other
proposed bodies need access to this type of information.
Any necessary investigations must be carried out by the police or other
agencies that the Act already covers. The thought that a local authority,
in particular, will obtain this sort of information is very frightening.
Local authority staff do not receive the same level of security clearance
and vetting as current users of this information and the opportunity for
corruption is unlimited. Secondly, the all-encompassing reasons for
obtaining such information mean that it would be open to abuse for
political ends.
This Government has proved that it cannot be trusted with even the most
basic information about individuals. Who knows what injustices and
persecutions will follow when a politically motivated local council obtains
information about individuals and groups with which it disagrees.
I have always justified the collection of intelligence about individuals on
the ground that it is handled by, in the main, apolitical, cleared and
vetted individuals with a need to know. I am no longer convinced that this
is the case. This Act must be repealed, not extended.
From:
Ian Coghlan, Lydney, Glos
Member Comments |
No member comments available...