104 Views

Big Debate: Have intrusions into privacy gone too far?

Yes:

Glenn Houlihan

“The Snooper’s Charter passed into law this week” reads one headline. “UK’s new surveillance law creates a national browser history with a search engine to match” states another. “The U.K. Just Passed the Most “Orwellian” Western Spying Bill Ever” shouts one more. You get the feeling that such a fundamentally intrusive bill would polarise parliament… You’d be wrong. Only 69 MPs voted against the Investigatory Powers Bill, 50 of which were SNP. A further 8 were Lib Dems. (That’s right, all 8 of them) How can there be such consensus among the UK’s heavyweight adversaries?

The answer as it often is with politics, is opportunism. By imposing a party line of abstention in March, Labour could, in their eyes, claim they were an avoiding an undemocratic derailment of long term government policy.  As Andy Burnham said at the time, “Outright opposition, which some are proposing tonight, risks sinking the bill and leaving the interim laws in place.” Yet this doesn’t account for the party’s summertime swing to cheerleading a bill which threatens the very concept of privacy.

The powers granted by this bill are ripe for abuse; they’re fashioned, by no accident, to facilitate mass surveillance. Supporters may argue that this intrusion is benign, but to take such a statement at face value would be a gross underestimation of political pragmatism. By ushering the bill through parliament, Britain’s largest two parties have reached a mutual understanding: dissent, irrelevant of the source’s ideology, is intolerable. It’s remarkably telling that the bill’s opponents stand no chance of forming a majority government. Again, enthusiasts can contend that strong governance should be cherished, that giving anonymity a free reign encourages – even perpetuates – anarchy. But this is exactly how totalitarianism flourishes.

A culture of fear, projected by the media and feasted upon by politicians determined to centralise power, allows authoritarianism to dilate. Strong law and order is celebrated; the unknown is declared dangerous, the nameless guilty without trial. The right to privacy is condemned as a comfort of the past, a commodity no longer affordable in this climate of rampant terror. Slowly, and surely, civil liberties are eroded.  

“If you’ve got nothing to hide you’ve got nothing to fear” rally the bill’s vanguard, toasting the unforeseen ease with which it slides through parliament. Bulk databases, bulk hacking, backdoors to encryption… These are the tools of repression, not the keys to freedom. Privacy has been intruded to the extent that its very definition has been mutated. “A state in which one is not observed or disturbed by other people” no longer exists: Theresa May’s draconian legislation has determined that.

In an era where the line between public and private becomes blurrier with each tweet, like and share, it isn’t difficult to envision a society devoid of solitude; a transparent mass of ‘social’ success overseen by the unseen. The Investigatory Powers Bill, the most extreme online surveillance legislation in a democratic country, is the first step on this path to digital dystopia.

 

No:

William Singh

It is frequently thrown around that we must choose between a dichotomy of freedom and security – the implication being that increasing one inevitably reduces the other. That rhetoric seems higher now than ever: a quick Google search for the so-dubbed ‘Snooper’s’ Charter’ – the Investigatory Powers Act – reveals a litany of anti-surveillance hysteria, and virtually no evidence of anyone in favour in the media.

In reality, however, the bill passed through parliament almost unanimously. A vote in June finished with 443 MPs in favour and just 69 against – with characters ranging from Iain Duncan Smith to John McDonnell, via George Osborne and Hilary Benn, all voting for it. Far from being an authoritarian legislation pushed through by an executive trying to maximise its powers, British security systems’ influence on personal freedoms is mainstream and minimal.

This much is undeniable: some surveillance into online communication is necessary in the twenty-first century; just as in the past phone records and postal letters could be intercepted or traced by security services, so too must legislation catch up with technology. It has lagged behind for years, meaning security services lack the legal processes they need to keep us safe; the chief of MI5 recently said that “there will be a terrorist attack in this country” at some point, and it will only be made more likely if police and government authorities lack the powers they need to find plots before they happen, and bring perpetrators to justice after crimes have been committed. As communication moves online, so too must investigatory powers if security is to be defended.

And remember, security is valuable not because government agencies fetishise reading your personal messages or going through your browser history – it is because only when we are secure can we exercise our freedoms. The choice, then, is not between security and liberty but determining how much freedom we are willing to give security services to allow them to do their own jobs, in order to for us to exercise our own valuable freedoms in peace.

Second, those criticising the Act for its out-of-control surveillance powers and unlimited government invasion of privacy are clearly out of step with the analysis of those who have followed the design of the bill most closely.

Labour members of parliament initially abstained from a vote on the bill in March, with many voting against. Virtually the entire parliamentary party – with only two rebels – voted for the bill in June, not because they had somehow been persuaded that they should back the Conservatives just for the sake of it, but because the process of amendment and debate have produced an Act which is restrained and limited. Keir Starmer, now Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary, has said that the government responded constructively to amending the bill and met “significant demands” to ensure the protection of human rights and privacy from arbitrary exercise of power. Warrants must be given by the Secretary of State or by a judge, and only certain limited methods of surveillance are permitted, for example interception of ‘metadata’ but not the content of communications.

The alternative is not that we all are totally free from surveillance or government authority – you can’t do anything online, after all, without some private company or other storing all manner of data on you. These powers are exercised by the security services of every country on earth – because they are absolutely essential for governments to uphold their first duty of existence, protecting its citizens, in a world of online communication. Instead, the alternative is that these powers are exercised behind the scenes, behind closed doors and outside of the realm of judicial oversight and public scrutiny. Instead, the current consensus has enshrined in statutes those practices which were already happening in practice, ensuring public transparency, ministerial accountability, and a proper due process for handling these powers.

Government policy is not malicious. Our representatives in parliament do not pass security measures because they hate our freedom or love invading our privacy; they do it because there is a widespread recognition from all parts of the political spectrum as well as from experts in the field that new powers are necessary for our security, and those powers are better held out in the open and clear on the statute books, with human rights protections built in to legislation. It is a necessary precondition for a practically free society, not an opponent of it.

Get the best viral stories straight into your inbox!

Don't worry, we don't spam

Leave a Reply

Join the Badger Team

Apply today!

Latest Posts

Union obliterates the debate – unwritten requirement used to shut down free speech debate
Campus News
505 views1
Campus News
505 views1

Union obliterates the debate – unwritten requirement used to shut down free speech debate

Jordan Wright - April 27, 2018

Student society Liberate the Debate’s most recent event was cancelled over a lack of compliance with the Students' Union's (USSU) requirement for a neutral chair - a…

Verve Couture – Musicality, kitsch & ignition: the beginning of a series
Arts
43 views
Arts
43 views

Verve Couture – Musicality, kitsch & ignition: the beginning of a series

Ricardo Reverón Blanco - June 17, 2018

Pictured: Zac Black At Proud Cabaret audiences were spellbound as if at night at the circus, yet this was not like Angela Carter’s magical realist novel; Verve…

Fleabag on stage at The Old Market – review
Arts
87 views
Arts
87 views

Fleabag on stage at The Old Market – review

Florence Dutton - June 11, 2018

[caption id="attachment_35513" align="alignnone" width="2400"] Fleabag at Soho Theatre[/caption] Last Monday at 8pm at Brighton’s The Old Market, I sat myself down in my theatre seat eagerly awaiting…

Fleabag preview
Arts
89 views
Arts
89 views

Fleabag preview

Florence Dutton - June 2, 2018

[caption id="attachment_35513" align="alignnone" width="2400"] Fleabag at Soho Theatre[/caption] Following the mass success of the Bafta award-winning BBC Series, DryWrite and Soho Theatre are about to hit the…

Brighton Festival: Ezra Furman at the Dome
Arts
112 views
Arts
112 views

Brighton Festival: Ezra Furman at the Dome

Georgia Grace - June 1, 2018

Having completed my final semester of university with modules on punk history and queer arts, it was fitting that I rounded off my end-of-assessment celebrations by attending…

Arts
134 views

The Tempest review

Georgia Grace - May 30, 2018

As the sun begins to set over Hove Green, tinnies of Red Stripe are cracked open, tartan blankets are strewn, and families tuck into their picnic hampers.…

A Glass Half Empty review
Arts
146 views
Arts
146 views

A Glass Half Empty review

Georgia Grace - May 27, 2018

For those of us coming to the end of another year of university study, the prospect of careers, marriages and babies may seem a long way off.…

DollyWould at The Old Market review
Arts
138 views
Arts
138 views

DollyWould at The Old Market review

Alex Hutson - May 27, 2018

Sh!t Theatre’s DollyWould is a hilarious, thoughtful and experimental performance piece. The award winning show has the Sh!t Theatre duo integrating comedy, storytelling, personal experience and music.…

UCU Launch Petition to End the ‘Hostile Environment’ at Sussex
Campus News
220 views
Campus News
220 views

UCU Launch Petition to End the ‘Hostile Environment’ at Sussex

Billie-Jean Johnson - May 26, 2018

The Sussex branch of the University and College Union (UCU) has launched a petition calling for Vice-Chancellor Adam Tickell to end the 'hostile environment' at Sussex. The…

Arts
102 views

Shakespeare in the sun – The Tempest preview

Georgia Grace - May 24, 2018

In a world of dystopian King Lears and female Hamlets, Shakespeare’s classics are constantly being reimagined for the modern day. There’s something oddly refreshing then about the…

Review: Nick Cave Double Bill at The Old Market (TOM’s Film Club)
Arts
206 views
Arts
206 views

Review: Nick Cave Double Bill at The Old Market (TOM’s Film Club)

Sophie Coppenhall - May 23, 2018

What a phenomenal contrast these two films present when watched side-by-side. In essence, together they are capable of tracing inner and outer metamorphoses of their subjects. The…

Dollywould at The Old Market preview
Arts
134 views
Arts
134 views

Dollywould at The Old Market preview

Alex Hutson - May 22, 2018

From the 22nd May - 25th May 2018 DollyWould will be showing at The Old Market. An exciting new show, presented by Sh!t Theatre, who won the…

Exhibition: Io-sono Fedilouu
Artist Focus
211 views
Artist Focus
211 views

Exhibition: Io-sono Fedilouu

Ricardo Reverón Blanco - May 16, 2018

Last week artist Fedilou made her debut exhibition in the downstairs space of Morelli Zorelli, a quaint vegan Italian restaurant in Hove, featuring a collection of intimate…

Interview with Philosophy faculty and COGS director Ron Chrisley
Interview
146 views
Interview
146 views

Interview with Philosophy faculty and COGS director Ron Chrisley

Nikolaos Manesis - May 15, 2018

Ron Chrisley is a Reader in Philosophy, on the faculty of the Sackler Centre for Consciousness Science, and is the director of COGS (Centre for Cognitive Science).…

Adam review
Arts
212 views
Arts
212 views

Adam review

Ketan Jha - May 13, 2018

If you have been a stranger to the stage this spring and decide to see one contemporary show, let it be Adam. This reviewer went in entirely…

Brighton Fringe Preview: Nick Cave Double Bill at The Old Market (TOM’s Film Club)
Arts
237 views
Arts
237 views

Brighton Fringe Preview: Nick Cave Double Bill at The Old Market (TOM’s Film Club)

Sophie Coppenhall - May 13, 2018

In celebration of iconic Brighton local, legendary alt-rock musician (and episodic actor) Nick Cave, TOM’s Film Club are hosting a double-bill screening of his films at The…

Whimsical fairy-tale meets class war – Standard: Elite review
Arts
274 views
Arts
274 views

Whimsical fairy-tale meets class war – Standard: Elite review

Georgia Grace - May 11, 2018

Meta-theatricality and interactivity are becoming all the more vogue in contemporary theatre, and in a world where the arts are becoming increasingly open and democratised, I find…

A Year of Art Society: The Best Picks
Artist Focus
189 views
Artist Focus
189 views

A Year of Art Society: The Best Picks

Alex Leissle - May 9, 2018

  [gallery type="slideshow" ids="35385,35386,35387,35388,35389,35390,35391,35392,35393,35394,35395,35396,35397,35398,35399,35400,35401,35402,35403,35404,35405,35406,35407,35408,35409,35410,35411"]

More Brit(ish) than ever: A review of Afua Hirsch at Brighton Festival
Books
198 views
Books
198 views

More Brit(ish) than ever: A review of Afua Hirsch at Brighton Festival

William Singh - May 9, 2018

Afua Hirsch’s 2018 book - part memoir, part polemic - provokes mixed feelings. So too did her discussion of the topic at this year’s Brighton Festival. Don’t…

Ethnic-bioweapons: between conspiracy and reality
Science
251 views
Science
251 views

Ethnic-bioweapons: between conspiracy and reality

Luke Richards - May 8, 2018

Bioweapons exist, while ethnic-bioweapons are whispered conspiracies. Pandemics can fairly hazardous to human life, the 1918 Flu Pandemic killed 20-50 million people. A man made pandemic could…

Breaking: Spring referenda results announced
News
260 views
News
260 views

Breaking: Spring referenda results announced

Jessica Hubbard - May 4, 2018

Students have voted to support the BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement, reject Prevent and adopt new Gender Equality policies. Results for the Students' Union referenda were…