Manny Thain
Prime Minister David Cameron is rushing a new ‘snooper’s charter’ through parliament. Using the threat of terrorism as a pretext, the law contains wide-ranging surveillance powers which will affect everyone in Britain.
So, why is he doing it, and why now?
Clearly, state surveillance has been getting a bad press lately. Edward Snowden blew the lid off with his revelations of the colossal extent of the snooping done by police and intelligence agencies in the US and Britain.
In April this year, the European Court of Justice ruled that EU powers allowing the blanket collection and retention of personal data, for a wide range of reasons completely unconnected to serious crime or terrorism, were excessive. Those laws were introduced into Britain in 2009 by the Labour government.
And this week, Liberty, Amnesty International and Privacy Inter-national are challenging the mass interception and collection of data by the government GCHQ spy centre in the High Court.
The Home Office claims that the new Data Retention and Investigatory Powers bill (Drip) merely clarifies existing law. What it really does is strengthen the law and extend the outsourcing of intelligence gathering to the private sector.
Currently, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (Ripa) imposes penalties on companies that refuse to comply with interception warrants. It also sets out the circumstances in which they may be requested to intercept on a permanent basis.
Interception requests
Drip goes further. Clause 4 of the bill requires overseas companies to comply with interception requests and to build that capability into their products and infrastructure. This will increase the powers of mass interception.
Clause 5 extends the Ripa definition of telecoms services much more widely, to include webmail and social media.
Isabella Sankey, of Liberty, put it bluntly: “This fast-track legislation contains sweeping surveillance powers that will affect every man, woman and child in the UK” (the Guardian, 14 July).
Cameron and his Liberal poodle, Nick Clegg, aim to force it through both houses of parliament this week. They can count on the spineless acquiescence of Ed Miliband. It is a stitch-up between the capitalist establishment parties, rushed through with little debate, scrutiny or accountability.
Clegg has been thrown a bone in the shape of a promised review of the law in 2016. But that is no real safeguard. If past ‘anti-terrorism’ laws are anything to go by, future parliaments will renew the law as a matter of course.
Of course, these sweeping powers will not be restricted to terrorists. They will be used against workers in struggle – as similar laws always have been. The capitalists are tooling up for the class battles to come. At present, they have the luxury of operating without a mass workers’ party to call them to account. That will change.
In the meantime, the need to campaign to defend and extend our democratic rights, and for the accountability of state forces and agencies, are essential parts of a programme for the workers’ movement.
