Protection of Freedoms Bill

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by PhiloHarrisomn, Feb 11, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Sky News and The Independent
    "Under the Protection of Freedoms Bill, Police will have to delete the records of innocent people from the national DNA database and there will be tighter regulation of CCTV with communities given more say on how cameras are used in their area.There will, apparently, be measures to curb CCTV, plus new safeguards of the right to protests and restrictions on the libel laws. The notorious RIPA law that allows local councils to spy on residents suspected of lying about where they live will be struck out".

    Government seeks to end a"13-year assault on hard-won British freedoms", Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has said.

    "Councils will be prevented from snooping in residents' lives, including by checking the contents of their rubbish and there will be a crackdown on rogue wheelclampers who will be banned from operating on private land".

    Does this reinstate freedom , restore balance between the State and the Public, and cull the private sector mafia? Or will this Bill be a measure some will regret?
  2. I'm pretty sure the same news outlets will be the first to print, "Why didn't the authorities intervene?"-type stories next time some kiddie gets killed by their parents. We may get the government we deserve but we also get the media we do too.
  3. The Register's take on this is interesting; The repeal bill: what's left in, what's left out • The Register

  4. Of course it makes every sense for "Chav sink estate" not to have cameras, as 60% of the population don't want their nasty brats seen rioting outsiude the local post office mugging the pensioners and attacking the property and persons of the 40% of remaining decent citizens.

    Democracy in action!

    Of course the private gated communities in Guildford will think it an excellent idea. (Oh, wait, they have their own anyway!)
  5. So if the Old Bill pick you for something you had no connection with you are OK with them keeping your DNA?

    I'm not and they can **** off - and if you agree with keeping the DNA so can you :evil:
  6. Not quite what I said in my post :)

    I happen to agree with you on the DNA.
  7. All too often the headline title of Bills during their passage through Parliament bear little relation to what they actually contain when they emerge from the Crown Printers when the intention underlying their introduction at first reading collides with the reality of committees and sub-committees and last-minute amendments.

    What may well start its life as a Bill to protect the freedom of the public may very well end up with an Act which protects the freedom of the official to do with what he likes with the freedom of the public.

    Anyone who believe in anything they are promised by British Politicians is dangerously deluded. Those people live in a world that advances their own intersts and certainly not yours!
  8. To my mind this all highlights the importance of the principle of the European Human Rights Act.

    The practical detail may sometimes be a bit problematic, but enshrining our rights in an Act which is beyond the reach of our self-serving and over-mighty politicians is, in my opinion, a bloody good idea.
  9. I agree. We have already seen in this last week the complete and utter arrogance of those from both parties who preach adherence to the rule of law when it suits them, and their utter contempt for it when it involves adhererence to the judgement of a court whose jurisprudence they have agreed to be bound by international treaty to observe because it comes down in favour of a class of individual they do not particularly like.

    If a state agrees by international treaty to be bound by a higher form of law, it cannot then renege on that when the judgement of that court proves to be inconvenient or unpopular.

    If we translate that attitude to the Bill under consideration, I can predict fairly confidently that whatever 'rights' and 'freedoms' are purported to be contained within it, each clause will be riddled with exceptions, exemptions, provisos, qualifications and excuses rendering the 'right' or 'freedom' in question little more than, at best, a weak permission, or at worst, something that lies in the discretionary power of the appropriate minister who may enlarge or restrict it by statutory instrument with the changing weather of political expediency. We already have evidence of that in their proposals to restrict the application of employment law in this country.

    Rights and freedoms that cannot withstand the chance or caprice of those whose interests are inconvenienced by that which they purport to grant are little worse than useless.
  10. Depends how you look at it, if someone raped your daughter/wife/mother but wasnt a convicted criminal would you like the police to look at their database and see if its anyone who was previously innocent? Or if the police had the DNA of those who were innocent they wouldnt waste time questioning them?
    Everyone wants these freedoms right up until the moment a crime affects them.

    Yeah, where as your saintly EU politicians are all for the little people.
  11. Given that EU Politicans, particularly those in the European Parliament are drawn mostly from those who have served in the UK Parliament or those who would not win enough support to make it there, I have no reason to trust them as a political class any more than I trust our own. What separates the operation of the two is that the institutions are completely different. In the United Kingdom, Parliament is dominated by an elected Monarch in the form of a Prime Minister. In the EU, the institutions have a far more effective separation of powers. In other words, although an idiot like Forage has a voice, he does not have the voice. In the United Kingdom, it is the Prime Minister who has the voice, although often it is mouthed by others.

    As for your reposte about being for the little people. Nearly all of your employment legislation and practically all of your consumer protection legislation came from Europe. It did not come from our own Parliament who are mainly concerned with either ensuring you are worked to death, taxed to death, fleeced or making sure that those rights that you do have are effectively neutralised by limiting as far as possible your ability to access the courts with proper legal representation in order to vindicate them!
  12. Hear Hear, if you have nothing to hide what is so objectionable about the Police having evidence which would exclude you from their enquiries? In My Opinion EVERYONE in the UK should have their DNA taken and EVERYONE should have a national Identity card by law.

    Nothing to hide? then you have nothing to fear...BUT, and it is indeed a very very big BUT, the control of that information must be scrupilously adhered to.... and that is where the scheme would probably fail.
  13. Just wait until the elected police commissioners start up!

    Beholden to the miserable old letter writers who now have access to email, and chavs who have nothing better to do. Like all elected officials with power they'll be doing and saying anything to stay in office.
  14. If you want to give your DNA to the state, go ahead. But I'll decide what happens with my DNA, thank you, not you and not the state.

    And stop watching CSI. All DNA evidence proves is the presence of some DNA, not whodunnit. It is circumstantial evidence and, as such, will not exclude anyone from any enquiry. You'll find that your DNA will have been spread over numerous crime scenes.
  15. Seems a good thing to me. I completely agree with the other posters about having a British Bill of Rights fully enshrined in law.

    Thats a very dangerous road to go down. Whats next, CCTV in everyones homes? Everyone fitted with tracking devices? Nothing to hide nothing to fear, right?

    You might have full confidence in our authorities and their desire to do good but I bloody well don't. The State has no buisness with my DNA.