Skip to content

Protecting your privacy

Do you want the Home Secretary to be able to order the storage of vast quantities of data about who you email and call, your physical location, your web browsing and Facebook sessions? No, neither do I. Untargeted, blanket powers like these are an invitation for future governments to invade your privacy.

That’s why this week I pressed the pause button on the Communications Data Bill that was going through Parliament. A special committee was established to look at the legislation and its conclusions, published on Tuesday, were crystal clear – the legislation didn’t strike the right balance between our security and our personal privacy. We need to have a fundamental rethink and produce better proposals which give the police and security professionals the powers they need without going over the top.

My decision sparked controversy in some quarters, with the usual allegations that by attempting to protect civil liberties you are, by default, on the side of terrorists and paedophiles. I’m not usually inclined to dignify such arguments with a response, but let me just repeat what I said in the papers: of course we need to look at what new technology means for how we protect people from serious crime, and we will need to take new measures to address the problem. But we can do that by striking the right balance between our collective security needs and our individual right to privacy.

That is a difficult balance to strike – even more so when you are in Government. But it is no use standing up for civil liberties in opposition if you then forget all about them in power. It’s the same pattern that sees politicians rule out a sane approach to drug laws until they are safely out of office and only then they reveal they always favoured the kind of approach this week’s Home Affairs Select Committee suggested – a willingness to look in an open-minded way at all the evidence and alternative ways of dealing with the problems caused by drugs.

In all of this I am bewildered by the way some of the biggest opponents of any kind of independent regulation of the press see no problem with the apparently limitless Government regulation of individual citizens. Liberalism for me is about protecting people from overmighty institutions while enabling people to get on in life. That’s not easy and we must always ensure that we ask ourselves tough questions, but I’m confident we are playing our part in getting the balance right. If you want to help the Liberal Democrats as we campaign for civil liberties you can support us here.

Related posts:

  1. A privacy law for MPs?
  2. Protecting playing fields
  3. Protecting the University of Wales’ assets

Posted in news.

Tagged with , .

One Response

Stay in touch with the conversation, subscribe to the RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. Jim says

    Dear Nick,

    Thanks for sticking up for the privacy thing. The idea is abhorant, and although there are many people opposed to it, I’m afaid that it would take a hell of a lot of work to convince me that it didn’t already go on.

    However, I am A single parent. I live in a small rural community in rural Wales. I rely on public transport. I desperately want to work, but there is nothing here. London may be different, but as I’m constantly bombarded with court summons regarding my daughter I could not possibly concieve moving her out of her high school to relocate for a job that may not materialise.

    In any event, I shouldn’t have to relocate…..I tried that under the Thatcher era, now I don’t live anywhere near my family. 20 years ago I would have had family support where I lived but I moved because polititians told me it wa the right thing to do. I believed them.

    So I sit at home, desperate for work yet being labelled by your government. For your information, I do not sit at home with my curtains shut all day. I am up at 6am….earlier than most people with jobs. I am expected to gain employment in a jobmarket that is at best disfunctional. I have to compete with every other single parent as well as other child carers for employment within the ours of schooling. That’s no mean feat.

    The money we get is not enough to survive on and it is getting less.

    I am embarrassed that we live off the state. I have (until becoming a single parent) been a proud man that was honoured to pay tax ( yes, some of us believe in paying tax).

    I bring my child up with a good moral background…saving the taxpayer thousands but charge society nothing for it, nor expect anything from society for it.

    Suppose I gave up? A defunct mother & grandparents that the family court deem unsuitable to rear children….how much would it cost the state?

    At 6am you will find my curtains open, I will take whatever work I can get…. I will shovel shit if thats whats needed…I don’t rightly care.

    But in the meantime, thanks for keeping my internet privacy. At least I can sit here rotting away taking comfort that the government aren’t spying on the internet usage that I probably won’t be able to afford in 12 months time.

    Jim xxx