Party groups unite against increased surveillance

Yesterday Mark Pack summarised the current state of play on the snooping row (“The wheels are coming off the online monitoring wagon”).

This topic has generated more emails, blogs and tweets from angry Lib Dems than anything I can remember. Party members seem to be united in their opposition to increased monitoring, so much so that statements from the so-called right and left of the party are virtually interchangeable.

From the Social Liberal Forum:

Any furthering of the already-extensive powers to interrogate peoples’ communication, especially in the absence of proper oversight, would constitute an ineffective and illiberal intrusion of our civil liberties and as such are unacceptable to Liberal Democrats and the wider public.

From Liberal Reform:

These proposals would mark a regression on civil liberties for the Liberal Democrats: extending rules that we campaigned against will be unpopular, unnecessary and inconsistent. They would not be in compliance with either the coalition agreement or liberal principles.

From Liberal Left:

We sacrifice our civil liberties at our peril. This is a terrible move in the wrong direction, one that no amount of window dressing by the masters and mistresses of spin in the party will make more palatable.

 

 

 

* Mary Reid is a contributing editor on Lib Dem Voice. She was a councillor in Kingston upon Thames, where she is still very active with the local party, and is the Hon President of Kingston Lib Dems.

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

6 Comments

  • Steve Griffiths 5th Apr '12 - 9:46am

    Speaking as one of the many ‘disappeared’; i.e. one of the thousands of activists that left the party over fees, coalition, rightward drift of the party etc, if you get this one wrong then you can forget us ever returning. You are just about to notice our absence at the upcoming May local elections – good luck!

  • Richard Dean 5th Apr '12 - 10:08am

    We do not defend our civil liberties at our peril. This move needs better discussion that this – does it improve our situation given the nature ofthe threats to our liberties? There are bad people out there, but there are bad people in here as well! No-one likes to lose a little liberty in order to defend a bigger one, but this may be an appropriate move in the right direction, one that rational debate may make more palatable. Or less as the case may be. The absence of debate is wholly anathema to the principles of liberal democracy.

  • Joshua DixonApr 04 – 4:55 pm…………….These groups may aim to divide us, yet our principles are what keeps us together and clearly make us stronger when we unite…………

    I, too, love “Mom and apple pie”.
    However, what are our principles; no tuition fees, the disabled, the NHS, 50% tax, etc.?

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.

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

  • Mary ReidMary Reid
    David Boyle really was a modern polymath. Yes, he was a great Liberal thinker - and I was inspired by him when serving on a policy working group on localism - b...
  • Mike Fleming
    Iran didn't have ambitions for nuclear weapons whereas Israel already has them. The biggest threat to Middle East stability is Israel, and supporting the illega...
  • expats
    How can you negotiate with Trump? He can change his mind, and back again, mid-sentence.. Israel, who deliberately started this war to sideline their Gaza genoc...
  • Richard
    The United States' war against Iran neither conforms to International Law nor to just war theory and should be strongly condemned by all....
  • John Waller
    When Ed opposed Trump he was right. NOW Iran will no longer negotiate. israel is running out of interceptors. This article suggests Iran has only 2,000 balli...