Who will stand up for our civil liberties?

The government, in its less than infinite wisdom, wants access to all our social media and email communication. Obviously both Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg have no sense of irony, a key criticism they made of Labour in office was that it was overly authoritarian and in fact it’s, admittedly appalling, record on civil liberties was craftily weaved into the Conservatives and now the Coalition’s anti-state rhetoric. This government, we were told, would be “strong in defence of freedom” and would restore the rights of individuals in the face of “encroaching state power”.

It isn’t possible to overstate how hollow those words are now exposed as being; not only are these proposals unnecessary, they are practically unenforceable. In Germany, where similar proposals were passed, the legislation collapsed under the weight of the number of complaints received against it and the Supreme Court eventually struck it down. This is another example of how being both unnecessary and unworkable seem to be key criteria government policy must fulfil nowadays. What next? Sand castles on the moon?

Sadly, I don’t hold out much hope that Labour will show its learnt a valuable lesson and steadfastly oppose these proposals. It was, after-all a Labour Home Secretary that first made them, though those who opposed them then are now pushing for their implementation. Civil liberties is another of those issues where all the three major parties are conniving to disenfranchise a large and important section of the electorate. The Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Labour consensus is that we must prosecute the farcical ‘war on terror’ by any means necessary, even if that means the destruction of the liberty they are supposed to be defending. It’s hard not to agree with Isabella Sankey, director of policy at Liberty;

Whoever is in government, the grand snooping ambitions of security agencies don’t change.

They remain and our elected representatives do nothing to challenge them. However, there are brave souls in all the parties and across the ideological spectrum who do agree on the fundamental need to challenge the excesses of creeping state power in this area. Maybe it is time for them to come together to put pressure on our respective Party leaderships. Certainly, Labour’s left needs to be vocal in distancing itself and campaigning against the leadership if they endorse these proposals. One of the points of terrorism is to encourage states to become more repressive (and therefore alienate a broader layer of the population and draw it into opposition to the state) and therefore these proposals are a victory for the terrorists they are supposed to be pursuing. We cannot allow that to happen and we cannot allow our liberties and freedoms to be trampled underfoot by this or any government. Labour must show it has learnt from the past and start standing-up for our civil liberties.

Advertisements

About darrellgoodliffe

n.a

6 responses to “Who will stand up for our civil liberties?”

  1. treborc says :

    That is the problem look at labour and Brown with his detention mess, and then when he wins he dumps it, saying we had to show them who was in charge, yes we did and now labour out.

    The fact is your right these are silly regulation but sadly we are living in a silly world right now.

    Labour Tory Tory labour……..

    Like

  2. Rhiannon Lockley (@illdoitanyway) says :

    Interesting point on terrorism purposefully building authoritarianism in enemy states – I had never considered that as a possibility though it is an area I know very little about (not just saying that in case any government agents are reading!).

    Like

  3. darrellgoodliffe says :

    treboc,

    I think we are to be honest, a very silly world.

    Rhiannon,

    Thanks. I see it a bit like gureilla warfare really, terrorists must not be unaware they are vastly outgunned and usually socially unpopular. However, the more repressive the state becomes, the more people start to see the state as the enemy….

    Like

  4. John reid says :

    The annoying thing is the Tores new they were going to introduce this anyway, jsut amde some point about they weren’t to win votes,MAybe David davis should stand down and hav a by eelction agiasnt it and we could endorse him.

    Like

  5. representingthemambo says :

    Reblogged this on Representing the Mambo and commented:
    Good piece on the sheer audacity of the government’s u-turn on the issue of e-mail surveillance. I still haven’t heard one even remotely plausible explanation of why these powers are needed, and why this is being raised now, unless it is a diversion, or a Machiavellian attempt to smoke David Davis out.

    Like

  6. darrellgoodliffe says :

    Thanks Representing 🙂

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: