Oh dear. Interception of Communications Commissioner does it again

I’ve blogged just once or twice or thrice about the many failings of the Interception of Communications Commissioner and his dreadful record, failing to ask the right questions, unwilling to investigate evidence of widespread abuses and ignoring questions over cost.

And now he’s spoken out over the highly controversial Draft Communications Data Bill – not against its extensive online snooping provisions or even to call for stronger safeguards (such as to remedy his own failures to look into strong evidence that the existing rules have been regularly broken). No, instead he’s called for the powers to be even more widely extended:

Ministers have said the [provisions of the Draft Communications Data Bill are] only to allow the police, the security services and tax officials to tackle terrorism and serious crime.

The proposals will stop local authorities and hundreds of other agencies from accessing such records.

But Sir Paul, whose job is to check such powers are being used appropriately, said the powers should not be limited to law enforcement agencies.

That attitude is in marked contrast to the Information Commissioner who, quite rightly, has been stressing the importance of protecting people’s privacy and the big risks in extending online monitoring.

Good thing the Interception of Communications Commissioner is only in post for a few more months really.

* Mark Pack is Party President and is the editor of Liberal Democrat Newswire.

Read more by or more about , or .
This entry was posted in News.
Advert

One Comment

  • The BBC are reporting that in her evidence to the Select Committee taking evidence on the Bill, Theresa May claimed that of the 30,000 urgent requests for information made last year 25 – 40% resulted in lives being saved. Has she been misreported, because this is frankly completely unbelievable? Did anyone on the committee pick up on this figure? If she actually said it did it not occur to her to wonder what it actually meant? It implies that prior to RIPA thousands of people in this country must have been dying every year because the police and security forces did not have the ability to monitor communications to the same extent. I really don’t remember that, and my memory goes back to the 50s.

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Neil James Sandison
    Liberalism has evolved over the centuries with many different names and alliances .That is good in terms of development of progressive politics . We are clearly...
  • Mark ValladaresMark Valladares
    @ Peter, Having briefly looked at the Legatum Institute report that you refer to, whilst I take your general point, their scoring system is a bit quirky. Mid...
  • Peter Martin
    @ Joe, Yes there is poverty in London but that still doesn't change the fact that London and the SE of England are where the wealth is. There would be less p...
  • expats
    I watched the programme and almost choked on my G&T when hearing 'an investor' stating that the public sector couldn't run anything efficiently... Despite ...
  • Mark ValladaresMark Valladares
    @ David, Thank you for raising this. I find myself wondering whether or not we need to think about how social care is provided (and by whom) just as much as ...