Britain's got some of Europe's toughest surveillance laws. Now it wants more

https://www.politico.eu/article/uk-bulking-up-spying-regime-breakneck-speed/

by timthorn • 3 years ago

102 95 3 years ago

The most immediate and palpable threat is the erosion of privacy. The notion that "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" is a dangerously simplistic view that ignores the fundamental importance of privacy as a human right. Privacy is not about hiding wrongdoing; it is about maintaining individual autonomy, freedom of thought, and the right to a personal life unscrutinized by an overreaching state.

But the risks extend far beyond privacy. History has shown us, time and again, that tools created for one purpose can and often are repurposed for more sinister ends. A government, benign today, could transform into a malicious entity tomorrow, wielding these surveillance capabilities to suppress dissent, manipulate public opinion, and maintain power through fear and control. The technological infrastructure for a surveillance state, once established, becomes a formidable tool in the hands of an oppressive regime.

stormfather• 3 years ago

I think one can even say that an authoritarian government is a more stable "state" than a benign one, and that due to entropy, all sufficiently perturbed governments decay to authoritarianism unless sustained by some external inputs. The input, in this case, being the activism of those who don't want to be surveilled.

Clubber• 3 years ago

You are right; authoritarianism is the default of states throughout history.

pjc5010• 3 years ago

activism of those who don't want to be surveilled.

The tricky bit, as with most UK law'n'order politics, and the rightwing playbook in general, is dealing with how people want other people surveilled. Fear of crime and immigration narratives drive a demand for "something to be done" and "more powers".

The ECHR is pretty weak against surveillance (https://www.echr.coe.int/documents/d/echr/fs_mass_surveillan...), but it has been used in some cases to reduce it. But see how unpopular ECHR is in the UK - because it applies to humans, not just citizens, and there's a lot of people who want the state to be lawless against non-citizens.

Throw839• 3 years ago

This already happened in UK.

dghughes• 3 years ago

"if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear" is a good phrase to throw right back at politicians who have closed door meetings about surveillance, or anything.

pjc5010• 3 years ago

"I've nothing to hide, I lost all my whatsapp messages when I changed phone" seems to be the common response.

ExoticPearTree• 3 years ago

It doesn't work like that, because the justification they respond with is that if they make things public then criminals will know how to better hide their illicit activities. Or something along the lines of "we're having closed door meetings for the safety and security of the people"...

FrustratedMonky2• 3 years ago

It is such a hollow argument. Anybody using "nothing to hide" arguments, go ahead and post your passwords.

Philosophy Tube episode on this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fCUTX1jurJ4

Shacklz• 3 years ago

right to a personal life unscrutinized by an overreaching state.

If it was just the state, then I might even be able to live with it, as my trust in my government is rather high, even if I do agree with your second paragraph on principle.

The problem though is that lax/non-existent privacy laws also allow Joe in marketing and his friends to do all kinds of creepy privacy-invading things, which I worry about much more. It fosters a mentality and culture around how to get the easiest to those who are most susceptible to whatever it is your peddling, and in today's day and age of social media I think it's fair to say that it's increasingly clear that that kind of culture isn't exactly a net favor for humanity as a whole.

It's probably naive from me but I'm honestly much more worried about big tech and their nonchalant approach to privacy than I am about dangers of my government going full surveillance state. The two issues are of course not entirely separate either, they're very much intertwined.

pjc5010• 3 years ago

Don't forget the press.

I had occasion to look up Chris Huhne (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chris_Huhne) as the energy secretary who kicked off the UK new nuclear programme, and right at the top of his wikipedia is .. the phone hacking scandal. Private surveillance by the press, which has been used for a wide variety of malicious gossip purposes rather than any kind of "speaking truth to power".

theonlybutlet• 3 years ago

A good example is Venezuela, this was a car crash in slow motion. I remember the incremental changes made to law being reported right throughout Hugo Chávez' term in office right from the beginning. He was wildly popular everyone trusted him, many warned of its implications each time a law was proposed and reported. And here we are today, Venezuela is a dictatorship.

As the saying goes, it happens slowly and then all at once.

southernplaces73• 3 years ago

as my trust in my government is rather high

Then you're very fortunate to live in one of the minority of places in the world where government is even moderately trustworthy. Many, possibly most people, dont and the tools of the surveillance state are increasingly being applied by their governments to further repress possible sources of change from that governing mean.

southernplaces73• 3 years ago

ignores the fundamental importance of privacy as a human right. Privacy is not about hiding wrongdoing; it is about maintaining individual autonomy, freedom of thought, and the right to a personal life unscrutinized by an overreaching state.

It's impressive how many people make this argument and then turn right around to fully support the full plethora of modern KYC and AML laws with all their dubious justifications and even more dubious applications with absolutely no sense of the double standard. One supposes that a rght to privacy, individual autonomy and a life unscrutinized by an orreaching state also should include these things applied firmly to ones financial life, at least enough that any larish transaction isn't treated as if it's potentially criminal right off the bat.

belter• 3 years ago

History has shown us, time and again, that tools created for one purpose can and often are repurposed for more sinister ends.

Back in 2008...

"UK terror law used for Iceland deposits" - https://www.ft.com/content/55398517-1ea9-3248-8205-3268e037b...

varispeed2• 3 years ago

This is really bad, because we have the most corrupt government since probably forever.

Nothing is being done to investigate them.

It looks like government is simply bribing security agencies and giving them nice toys in a silent agreement "you don't touch us, we don't touch you".

That said, this is not sustainable.

dijit4• 3 years ago

I think it's wrong to say that nothing is being done to investigate them.

However there's a weird thing that I've witnessed. Large crimes are being ignored and instead non-crimes (or minor-crimes) are blown out of proportion. Then the investigations consume all the oxygen eventually sliding off the ruling party like water off a duck.

A rotation of cabinet, a new face to lead and all is forgotten it seems. Faith in the alternative parties is also shockingly low (not that I am a labour supporter under Kier.. but that's also kinda my point).

People would rather lurch even further right for answers, many people loudly supporting "Reform UK" which is the political refit of "the brexit party" and even before that was the "UK independence party"- a purely populist party.

HOWEVER.

The UK has been on the decline since 1992 (or earlier) and managing a nation in decline must be extremely difficult. Nobody is willing accept that they're poorer, financial services need the pound to remain strong so they keep the currency from falling which in turn makes everyone unable to afford to live.

It is a sticky situation with no clear answer other than to muck down and face the reality that if we want to be a wealthy nation again we either need to go back to exploiting other countries or produce things of value.

pjc5010• 3 years ago

Large crimes are being ignored and instead non-crimes (or minor-crimes) are blown out of proportion

As always: by whom? And the answer: the press.

The UK media are pro-Tory and far-right to such an extent that they quietly ignore all this massive corruption in favor of slamming alternatives down at every opportunity. The only exception recently has been the Mirror's dogged "partygate" series.

FiniteField• 3 years ago

People would rather lurch even further right for answers

God forbid we have an even more "far right" government than the one that has overseen a full decade of all-time-high immigration, has utterly failed to stop the years-long exponential increase in illegal boat border crossings, has swept under the rug the revelations of rape gangs operating in towns and cities all throughout England, has rolled out the red carpet for agitative gender and race activist groups to take root in every institution from museums to universities to primary schools to the civil service, ....

tim3333• 3 years ago

Well...

Keir Starmer pledges to clean up politics and crack down on cronyism

headline today. You never know.

roenxi4• 3 years ago

The UK's energy use per capita has dropped more than 25% since 2000 (which to be honest is a pretty successful energy policy compared to what a move away from coal could have been).

It is interesting to compare them to Japan where the downtrend isn't anywhere near as marked and is potentially related to some change in energy policy related to 2011 [0].

It would be a lot easier to get people focused on stuff higher up on Maslow's hierarchy, like privacy, if they were warm, comfortable and could afford to manufacture stuff locally. Otherwise they'll probably need to buckle down for some internal strife, shrinking real pie could result in all sorts of weirdness. I'm not sure what the precedent is for a 25% drop in energy.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_power_in_Japan#Post-Fu...

pjc5010• 3 years ago

Trying to crowbar nuclear in here is ridiculous; the UK has been a surprising renewables success, despite everyone's best efforts, and we're still waiting for Hinkley Point C to be finished.

could afford to manufacture stuff locally

"UK manufacturing sector climbs to eighth in world rankings"

https://www.themanufacturer.com/articles/uk-manufacturing-se...

No, the surveillance stuff is pure elite politics and not driven by freezing pensioners.

roenxi4• 3 years ago

25% is equivalent to going from an ordinary week to not having energy on weekends. Someone is getting squeezed. Change of that magnitude should tinge the interpretation of all social trends.

If I was an elite in the UK, I'd want to be going totalitarian too. Someone should be getting hopping furious; these numbers are comparable to unravelling-of-social-fabric events. Although ironically the totalitarians seem to be outperforming the UK economy; China claims to have overtaken them on a per capita energy basis back in 2020.

pjmlp2• 3 years ago

I always feel more controlled in Britain than Germany or Switzerland, with the amount of "You should do this, You should not do that" messages all over the place, and thanks to CCTV, in the places I regularly visit I seldom see any car badly parked.

dukeyukey• 3 years ago

Although it's worth remembering the UK is still a popular place is "disappear" since it's doesn't have an overarching ID system like most Western countries, and the UK doesn't track people anywhere near as much as it's neighbours.

pjc5010• 3 years ago

You'd have to try pretty hard to do that, because you won't be able to work, have a bank account, rent, or purchase a house.

We don't have an ID system but we have a lot of ID requirements.

pjmlp2• 3 years ago

My experience being controlled as foreigner for various kinds of reasons kind of differs.

Nextgrid5• 3 years ago

How does the tax authority keep track of who's dodging taxes? The fact you don't have the concept of ID cards is irrelevant if the tax authority still has an incentive to keep tabs on people (which it does in order to detect tax evasion).

bufio2• 3 years ago

Britain feels simultaneously strict and lawless. It's strange, but it's hard to imagine things turning out any other way in this country.

lotsofpulp• 3 years ago

The US and other places can be like that too. Strict if you have something to lose, but not enough to protect yourself. Lawless if you have nothing to lose, or enough to protect yourself.

So bottom 20% and top ~5% to 10% are golden, middle 20% to 60% are hoping (dreaming?) to make it up a few deciles, and 60% to 90% are hoping to make it to top 10%. And until they make it there, they have to dot their i’s and cross their t’s.

pjc5010• 3 years ago

I deeply hate the "Welcome to the UK border" signs at airports. More than most countries, it's a first impression of petty authoritarianism.

Symbiote3• 3 years ago

Nowadays those signs are supplemented with "Please don't assault our staff". What a nice country.

Log_out_• 3 years ago

It's a left over from good old imperialism. And it's still immensely preferable to the rule of none currently spreading in the shape of civil war.

Glawen• 3 years ago

I never understood the reason behind these messages, is it because they think everyone is dumb ? In continental europe messages are meant to forbid stuff, it is rare to see a "mind the gap" message.

Symbiote3• 3 years ago

"Mind the gap" used to be played only at some 19th-century stations built on tight curves, where the gap between the carriage and the platform could be 20 or even 30cm. (The widest is 37.5cm.) That's a safety hazard, especially for blind people, so the announcements have existed for decades.

It's more recent that the pointless announcement has been made at many stations.

http://www.metadyne.co.uk/mind_the_gap.htm

gadders3• 3 years ago

We can still wash our cars on a Sunday though?

AlexAndScripts• 3 years ago

It was really striking when I came back (to the UK) from a short trip to Switzerland. In Switzerland, or at least the touristy parts of Geneva, orderliness, respect, and civility were assumed - and, at least as far as I can tell, followed. While I couldn't read everything (merely the psuedocomprehensibility you get with related languages), I only saw a single "behave yourselves" message. We discussed it at the time and our French speaker said that he had also only seen that one. In Britain there were multiple giant billboards about not harassing various people (mostly staff) before you even got to customs.

I'm skeptical of their effectiveness, and while I hesitate to make broad statements based on just a few days in a country it seems to me to be indicative of a major cultural difference.

echelon_musk• 3 years ago

If anyone has stories of or suggestions for where to emigrate to from the UK I'd be interested.

The news of ever increasing state surveillance, rising inequality, low salaries, privatisation leading to sewage filled waterways and the deliberate destruction of the NHS, revolving door cronyism and the weather contribute to feelings of dissatisfaction.

Maybe the grass isn't actually greener elsewhere(?)

jampekka5• 3 years ago

Nordic countries are still relatively nice. And very receptive to "skilled labor" immigration due to the population aging fast.

We too are circling the neoliberal drain like UK but are perhaps a decade or so behind. And racism is rising rapidly. :(

I'm from a Nordic country but have lived in England. To be frank, in many areas it's a real shithole country, and I'd really not want to live there. Not as bad as USA but getting there fast.

mp055• 3 years ago

> And racism is rising rapidly > To be frank, in many areas it's a real shithole country

Thanks to Trump, the term "shithole country" has now been termed as a dogwhistle for racists, so I'm genuinely curious as to what you mean when you're calling certain parts of England a shithole?

weego• 3 years ago

Finland is the country I've targeted for if I eventually want to leave the UK.

landosaari• 3 years ago

Sorry, have not seen "very receptive".

Received a masters degree in STEM from a Nordic country. This somehow rendered me less desirable in being hired?

Living on the streets is not what I envisioned while signing up for an university program.

DyslexicAtheist2• 3 years ago

hard to recommend a place that is better than another because surveillance has unequal distribution so time is never in your favor.

Countries that have progressed rapidly in their digital transformation are also (generally speaking) further down in their transformation into a "control society".

So wherever you go (and unless you chose to start from scratch living on your own farm) it's impossible to escape for very long.

Another thing to take into account, is whether legislation has also transformed itself in favor of civil rights during the same time. But can only happen as a second step, and much slower (law when applied needs precedent). Odds that civil rights transform equally fast and fair immediately are nil (and in favor of more tech and more surveillance).

To "get out" (if there is such a thing) one would have to move to a place that is far behind in that regard (and even here YMMV because some poor countries transform into control societies ling before they are digitally transformed).

Nextgrid5• 3 years ago

Alternatively, Eastern Europe countries might be an option. It's the same level of shit as the UK, but at least the cost of living appropriately reflects it.

moffkalast3• 3 years ago

I think in the last "which country would you most want to be annexed by" joke survey, the top UK answer was Australia.

tonyedgecombe• 3 years ago

rising inequality

Inequality has been pretty stable over the last couple of decades:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/872472/gini-index-of-the...

intunderflow• 3 years ago

I moved to Denmark from the UK and I've loved it.

Public services are significantly and noticeably better (my doctor once profusely apologised to me that because of resources my referral could not be the same day he made it but had to be the next morning), the tax rate is lower (because of the Tax Scheme for Researchers) the government isn't spending its days on some War on Woke bs and I'm generally much happier. After a year here I've already purchased a home and am planning to stay for the long term :)

I have dual UK-EU citizenship which helped.

vintermann• 3 years ago

It doesn't have tough surveillance laws, it's got permissive surveillance laws. Tough surveillance laws would mean laws that were tough on the people doing surveillance.

pi-e-sigma• 3 years ago

'Toughness' of the law is defined by how harsh it is on the people, not the state apparatus.

_fat_santa• 3 years ago

Tech companies are most concerned by a change that would allow the Home Office to issue notices preventing them from making technical updates that might impede information-sharing with U.K. intelligence agencies.

This is so shockingly shortsighted it's almost funny. Do the people writing these bills not consult with any technical advisors? I mean they somehow took the concept of a backdoor (which in itself is already a very bad idea) and somehow made that concept even worse. At least with a backdoor, a tech company could preserve some semblance of security to a system outside of the parties that have this backdoor access. Keeping exploits in is just egging on bad actors to find the exploits that the spy agencies have already found. I'm honestly speechless.

jwie• 3 years ago

Destroy the cameras.

FrustratedMonky2• 3 years ago

Wasn't part of Brexit because they were angry at European governments having too much information. That they didn't like being under their thumb?

dijit4• 3 years ago

Hilariously, when I point out the hypocrisy of Brexit to people they never seem to grasp it.

"Unelected" -> Literally a monarchy with a sitting house of lords, which still includes some hereditary titles.

"Bureaucrats" -> One of the most paper/form heavy countries in the EU (Aside from Germany in some cases).

tharmas• 3 years ago

Agreed. But it was Eastern European migration that turned the working class against the EU. And it could be that diktats from "one of own" is easier to swallow than coming from "that foreign lot"

happymellon2• 3 years ago

Not that I'm aware of.

There was something about sending money to the EU for them to reinvest in cities in the UK which weren't London.

And more likely, the new AML laws that would have impacted our politicians and private companies ability to hide taxable income.

alienicecream• 3 years ago

Why do the British put up with this? Are they just docile and subservient by nature? Did turning the old working class into an underclass eliminate the only political faction with balls?

Britain's got some of Europe's toughest surveillance laws. Now it wants more

Related Stories