17 April 2009
Of over half a million uses of surveillance powers by officials each year only about 12,000 (or 1 in 400) are by a local authorities [1]. Yet the review of the powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 announced by the Home Office today [2] chooses to emphasise the tiny minority of cases where local authorities (rather than the police, government departments or quangos), are involved in what is called in the jargon 'intrusive surveillance'. It proposes a new official code of practice will deal with recently publicised abuses.'This is yet another sickening con-trick from an incurably mendacious department. The Home Office is taking advantage of the publicity surrounding a handful of special cases out of millions, to pretend to be limiting the surveillance culture that in fact it is rapidly expanding.-ENDS-
'Who decides when watching you, bugging you, checking who you telephone, and overseeing what you read online are justified? The bureaucrat’s answer is — the same organisations doing the snooping. We don’t need more codes of practice, a different set of boxes to be ticked. We need independent assessment of every surveillance request by a magistrate or judge, who can look at the facts, not just the procedure.'
The NO2ID Campaign
Box 412
19-21 Crawford Street
London W1H 1PJ
enquiries@no2id.net
Tel: 07005 800 651
Press: click here
