From: clive.denton
Date: 2006-11-02 12:23:54
Well it’s official folks “Britain is ‘surveillance society”… Yet we can not say it is an outrage or intrusive because those that are against our ‘Surveillance society’ have something criminal or underhand to hide. And not because we have a right to our privacy if we are not perpetrators in criminal activities. Our Government insists all laws must never be broken, yer right like selling peerships or being involved in illegal wars 😉 Clive ——————————————— Britain is ‘surveillance society’ Story from BBC NEWS:news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr… Published: 2006/11/02 10:14:04 GMT Fears that the UK would “sleep-walk into a surveillance society” have become a reality, the government’s information commissioner has said. Richard Thomas, who said he raised concerns two years ago, spoke after research found people’s actions were increasingly being monitored. The Surveillance Studies Network report said there are up to 4.2m CCTV cameras – about one for every 14 people. Other techniques are used to record work rate, buying habits and movements. Surveillance will increase in the next decade, the report added. ‘Looser laws’ The report’s co-writer Dr David Murakami-Wood told BBC News that, compared to other industrialised Western states, the UK was “the most surveilled country”. “We have more CCTV cameras and we have looser laws on privacy and data protection,” he said. “We really do have a society which is premised both on state secrecy and the state not giving up its supposed right to keep information under control while, at the same time, wanting to know as much as it can about us.” People grumble about data protection, but boy is it important in this new age
Richard Thomas
Information Commissioner The research says surveillance ranges from the US national security agency monitoring all telecommunications traffic passing through Britain to key stroke information used to gauge work rates and global positioning satellite information tracking company vehicles. The report also highlights “dataveillance” – the combination of credit card, mobile phone and loyalty card information for marketing purposes. Mr Thomas called for a debate about the risks if information gathered is wrong or falls into the wrong hands. “We’ve got to say where do we want the lines to be drawn? How much do we want to have surveillance changing the nature of society in a democratic nation?” he told the BBC. “We’re not luddites, we’re not technophobes, but we are saying not least don’t forget the fundamental importance of data protection, which I’m responsible for. “Sometimes it gets dismissed as something which is rather bureaucratic, it stops you sorting out your granny’s electricity bills. People grumble about data protection, but boy is it important in this new age. “When data protection puts those fundamental safeguards in place, we must make sure that some of these lines are not crossed.” ‘Balance needed’ The report will be presented to the 28th International Data Protection and Privacy Commissioners’ Conference in London on Thursday, hosted by the Information Commissioner’s Office. The office is an independent body established to promote access to official data and to protect personal details. The Department for Constitutional Affairs (DCA) said there needed to be a balance between sharing information responsibly and respecting the citizen’s rights. A spokesman said: “Massive social and technological advances have occurred in the last few decades and will continue in the years to come. “We must rise to the challenges and seize the opportunities it provides for individual citizens and society as a whole.” Graham Gerrard from the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) said there were safeguards against the abuse of surveillance by officers. “The police use of surveillance is probably the most regulated of any group in society,” he told the BBC. “Richard Thomas was particularly concerned about unseen, uncontrolled or excessive surveillance. Well, any of the police surveillance that is unseen is in fact controlled and has to be proportionate otherwise it would never get authorised.” Have you been affected by the UK’s “surveillance society”? If so, contact us using the form below. If you don’t mind talking to us further, please include contact details. Name: Email address: Town and Country: Phone number (optional): Comments:
