Intrustion in to privacy

Lets forget about identity cards:

They solve nothing but can hold a lot of data which I cannot verify therefore unable to  correct if some Government Official inputs data wrongly

Scrap Big Brother CCTV Everywhere: including the home and on the road, where Speed Cameras have little to do with safety but fund raisers.

It also solves nothing merely records it. NB Bulger: great, it caught the little buggers (only to be released again) but didn't stop the child being killed.

The request for unnecessary data on tax returns, VAT returns and the National Census. In the latter case, contrary to popular belief it is not used for the positive way which it claims.

Storing any form of data without my consent or knowing what is actually recorded on that data base.

Scrapping the BBC.

Why is this idea important?

Lets forget about identity cards:

They solve nothing but can hold a lot of data which I cannot verify therefore unable to  correct if some Government Official inputs data wrongly

Scrap Big Brother CCTV Everywhere: including the home and on the road, where Speed Cameras have little to do with safety but fund raisers.

It also solves nothing merely records it. NB Bulger: great, it caught the little buggers (only to be released again) but didn't stop the child being killed.

The request for unnecessary data on tax returns, VAT returns and the National Census. In the latter case, contrary to popular belief it is not used for the positive way which it claims.

Storing any form of data without my consent or knowing what is actually recorded on that data base.

Scrapping the BBC.

End the Police State

Police can (and do) arrest law-abiding citizens knowing they are innocent and then put them on databases as 'court convictions'. In theory the innocent can apply to have their Samples deleted. In practice it is next to impossible. a) A malcious complaint is made b) The police arrest 'to preserve the evidence c)  The allegation is disproved d) The police NFA leaving samples on the databases and inaccurate input based on the complaint e) Details of the complaint are refused citing the Data Protection Act and the malicious complainant is not pursued f) if the Accused manages (despite Westcott b Westcott) to prove that arrest was not necessary ('exceptional case') samples might be removed. Compenation: peanuts. Cost to innocent: tens of thousands. Career and earnings limitations: enhanced CRB checks = a whole industry with some 300,000+ in annually Essex alone. Police should be made to examine the evidence before arrest wherever possible and allow the 'suspect' to disprove the allegation BEFORE being put on the databases.

Why is this idea important?

Police can (and do) arrest law-abiding citizens knowing they are innocent and then put them on databases as 'court convictions'. In theory the innocent can apply to have their Samples deleted. In practice it is next to impossible. a) A malcious complaint is made b) The police arrest 'to preserve the evidence c)  The allegation is disproved d) The police NFA leaving samples on the databases and inaccurate input based on the complaint e) Details of the complaint are refused citing the Data Protection Act and the malicious complainant is not pursued f) if the Accused manages (despite Westcott b Westcott) to prove that arrest was not necessary ('exceptional case') samples might be removed. Compenation: peanuts. Cost to innocent: tens of thousands. Career and earnings limitations: enhanced CRB checks = a whole industry with some 300,000+ in annually Essex alone. Police should be made to examine the evidence before arrest wherever possible and allow the 'suspect' to disprove the allegation BEFORE being put on the databases.

Removal of the 70 mph motorway limit

 

The 70 mph motorway limit is a relic of the past. Introduced in 1965 when cars lacked the modern safety features that almost every car on Britain's roads today have.  Today most drivers ignore the limit anyway, so why not scrap it completely? At the very least it should be raised.
The autobahn system in which an advisory speed limit of 80 mph is set is very effective and there is no noticeable difference in casualties between German autobahns and British motorways. The fact is for many days of the year it is perfectly safe for a vehicle to travel at speeds greater than 70 mph. And for those days where it isn't? Well I'm sure the British public have the ability to exercise some degree of common sense.

Why is this idea important?

 

The 70 mph motorway limit is a relic of the past. Introduced in 1965 when cars lacked the modern safety features that almost every car on Britain's roads today have.  Today most drivers ignore the limit anyway, so why not scrap it completely? At the very least it should be raised.
The autobahn system in which an advisory speed limit of 80 mph is set is very effective and there is no noticeable difference in casualties between German autobahns and British motorways. The fact is for many days of the year it is perfectly safe for a vehicle to travel at speeds greater than 70 mph. And for those days where it isn't? Well I'm sure the British public have the ability to exercise some degree of common sense.

Clarification of data sharing obligations of public bodies

To provide a simple requirement to cover the obligations of public bodies to provide (or not) information to each other.

One example of this is Section 17 of Schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 1992, This protects peoples data collected for Council Tax purposes, but appears to conflict with legislation covering, amongst others, HMRC, the police and the CSA. All of these have generic legislation, but make many requests for information from Council Tax authorities, whereas there is specific legislation covering electoral registration and certain housing functions.

There must be many other examples of this where similar disclosure (or non-disclosure) requirements exist.

These uncertainties and conflicts could be removed by a simple piece of generic legislation which could either enable disclosure, or prevent it. I would be happy either way – I just want a) clarity and b) to stop endless arguments about whether someone is entitled to information or not

Why is this idea important?

To provide a simple requirement to cover the obligations of public bodies to provide (or not) information to each other.

One example of this is Section 17 of Schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 1992, This protects peoples data collected for Council Tax purposes, but appears to conflict with legislation covering, amongst others, HMRC, the police and the CSA. All of these have generic legislation, but make many requests for information from Council Tax authorities, whereas there is specific legislation covering electoral registration and certain housing functions.

There must be many other examples of this where similar disclosure (or non-disclosure) requirements exist.

These uncertainties and conflicts could be removed by a simple piece of generic legislation which could either enable disclosure, or prevent it. I would be happy either way – I just want a) clarity and b) to stop endless arguments about whether someone is entitled to information or not

Stop the Police using unmanned aerial camera drones to monitor the public

 

To remove the legal right for Police to use unmanned aerial camera drones to monitor the UK public:

 

Since 2007, the Police have steadily introduced unmanned camera drones for routine monitoring of the UK population.  This scheme was initially introduced by Kent Police as a means to monitor maritime movements but documents obtained under FOI reveal that this was in part just a public relations exercise in preparation to use them for routine surveillance of all areas of public life.

 

The two main types of police drone surveillance:

1)  Remote controlled rotor blade cameras that hover 50m above the ground.  These silent cameras are at least visible but they have the disadvantage of further alienating the Police from the public they serve, as described by participants of the Olympic handover celebrations in the Mall.

2)  BAE UAV drones that fly for up to 15hrs at 20,000ft and are invisible from the ground.

 

Why is this idea important?

 

To remove the legal right for Police to use unmanned aerial camera drones to monitor the UK public:

 

Since 2007, the Police have steadily introduced unmanned camera drones for routine monitoring of the UK population.  This scheme was initially introduced by Kent Police as a means to monitor maritime movements but documents obtained under FOI reveal that this was in part just a public relations exercise in preparation to use them for routine surveillance of all areas of public life.

 

The two main types of police drone surveillance:

1)  Remote controlled rotor blade cameras that hover 50m above the ground.  These silent cameras are at least visible but they have the disadvantage of further alienating the Police from the public they serve, as described by participants of the Olympic handover celebrations in the Mall.

2)  BAE UAV drones that fly for up to 15hrs at 20,000ft and are invisible from the ground.

 

Surveilance Subjects Must (eventually) be Notified

Identified subjects of official surveilance should, in the long term, be notified of which of their communications where intercepted, the justification for doing so and the conclussions drawn.

Obviously it would not be sensible to do this while the enquiry was in progress. A time limit should be set, say five years, by the end of which such notification must take place.

Meanwhile the amount of surveilance being conducted should be published regularly and in detail. Number of phone calls tapped. Number of numbers traced, number of e-mails read and so forth.

Why is this idea important?

Identified subjects of official surveilance should, in the long term, be notified of which of their communications where intercepted, the justification for doing so and the conclussions drawn.

Obviously it would not be sensible to do this while the enquiry was in progress. A time limit should be set, say five years, by the end of which such notification must take place.

Meanwhile the amount of surveilance being conducted should be published regularly and in detail. Number of phone calls tapped. Number of numbers traced, number of e-mails read and so forth.

End/Reduce Collection of Data from ISPs

ISPs have been bullied and cajoled into keeping vast quantities of information about every single action a person takes online, and being well versed in computers, I can avoid this if I so wish.

Therefore, those who are most dangerous and require monitoring are completely able to ignore this and pass straight through the net, no matter how many 'restrictions' are placed on it.

It criminalises the innocent, leading to paranoia about something that should be essentially private. Do not trade any more of our freedom for security, if anything we should be given our freedom back, and refuse to live in fear.

Why is this idea important?

ISPs have been bullied and cajoled into keeping vast quantities of information about every single action a person takes online, and being well versed in computers, I can avoid this if I so wish.

Therefore, those who are most dangerous and require monitoring are completely able to ignore this and pass straight through the net, no matter how many 'restrictions' are placed on it.

It criminalises the innocent, leading to paranoia about something that should be essentially private. Do not trade any more of our freedom for security, if anything we should be given our freedom back, and refuse to live in fear.

Ban IEMI harvesting

Some shopping centres (noteably Gunwharf Quays in Portsmouth) as well as national chains of coffee shops routinely gather the IEMI numbers of mobile phones and other similar devices carried by the customers who visit these establishments. At present there is little publicity or scrutiny of the scale of such automated IEMI harvesting or the uses to which the data so gathered is put.

Why is this idea important?

Some shopping centres (noteably Gunwharf Quays in Portsmouth) as well as national chains of coffee shops routinely gather the IEMI numbers of mobile phones and other similar devices carried by the customers who visit these establishments. At present there is little publicity or scrutiny of the scale of such automated IEMI harvesting or the uses to which the data so gathered is put.

A Fresh Canvas

So many of the almost 3,500 laws affecting civil liberties and introduced during the past three terms of the labour government seem to be pieces of an almost sinister jigsaw of control over freedoms by the state that it might make more sense wiping the slate clean, repealing all these laws and establishing a new mode of law introduction a key element of which involves 'the people' having the final say in whether a law is passed or not. A final 12-man/woman jury to vett the wisdom of the politicians and judges who, with all due respect, often operate, live and function far from the real world on the streets of London's Kilburn or Camden, Manchester, Bristol, Glasgow, Arbroath, Plymouth etc.

Why is this idea important?

So many of the almost 3,500 laws affecting civil liberties and introduced during the past three terms of the labour government seem to be pieces of an almost sinister jigsaw of control over freedoms by the state that it might make more sense wiping the slate clean, repealing all these laws and establishing a new mode of law introduction a key element of which involves 'the people' having the final say in whether a law is passed or not. A final 12-man/woman jury to vett the wisdom of the politicians and judges who, with all due respect, often operate, live and function far from the real world on the streets of London's Kilburn or Camden, Manchester, Bristol, Glasgow, Arbroath, Plymouth etc.

CCTV & Surveillance

CCTV – Abolish the law that allows the unjustified mass surveillance of innocent people by CCTV so that we can be free again. That includes all police, council, NHS and privately held CCTV as well as those in and on buses and trains. CCTV cameras are one of the most anti-social forms of behaviour that I can think of yet there is no one to whom we can turn to for protection. I am sick and tired of being treated like a criminal!

ANPR – Abolish the ANPR CCTV system on our roads for the same reason as above.

Surveillance – Abolish all laws which permit unwarranted surveillance of any kind and, guarantee the privacy of all communications. Stop spying on us!

 

*Note – I have already posted this idea but it was mixed in with a whole lot of others. I thought it would be better on its own.

Why is this idea important?

CCTV – Abolish the law that allows the unjustified mass surveillance of innocent people by CCTV so that we can be free again. That includes all police, council, NHS and privately held CCTV as well as those in and on buses and trains. CCTV cameras are one of the most anti-social forms of behaviour that I can think of yet there is no one to whom we can turn to for protection. I am sick and tired of being treated like a criminal!

ANPR – Abolish the ANPR CCTV system on our roads for the same reason as above.

Surveillance – Abolish all laws which permit unwarranted surveillance of any kind and, guarantee the privacy of all communications. Stop spying on us!

 

*Note – I have already posted this idea but it was mixed in with a whole lot of others. I thought it would be better on its own.

Repeal all legislation imposing enforcement duties on Local Authorities

Local Authorities have a wide range of enforcment duties imposed on them; e.g. dealing with underage sales of fireworks, alcohol and tobacco, dealing with anti-social behaviour, noise nuisance and similar matters.

 

The traditional methods of investigating these (used for decades) are now considered surveillance and LAs are expected to get RIPA authorisation for them. As it appears certain that this authorisation wil be removed from councils, so should the duties as they will become ueforceable.  No tasks without the tools to do them!

Why is this idea important?

Local Authorities have a wide range of enforcment duties imposed on them; e.g. dealing with underage sales of fireworks, alcohol and tobacco, dealing with anti-social behaviour, noise nuisance and similar matters.

 

The traditional methods of investigating these (used for decades) are now considered surveillance and LAs are expected to get RIPA authorisation for them. As it appears certain that this authorisation wil be removed from councils, so should the duties as they will become ueforceable.  No tasks without the tools to do them!

That the Government restore freedom and liberty by removing the general monitoring of the population of the UK

Stop the routine monitoring of people by CCTV, Automatic Number plate recognition, facial recognition technologies, Travel cards i.e. Oyster, Chips, storing of emails, tracking of Internet sites visited, tracking countries visited by people, storing of text messages etc. To halt implementation of new technologies around facial recognition or other methods to monitor and log the public’s movements.

Why is this idea important?

Stop the routine monitoring of people by CCTV, Automatic Number plate recognition, facial recognition technologies, Travel cards i.e. Oyster, Chips, storing of emails, tracking of Internet sites visited, tracking countries visited by people, storing of text messages etc. To halt implementation of new technologies around facial recognition or other methods to monitor and log the public’s movements.

Stop Councils Snooping on Individuals

Amend the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 200 to ensure that it is used solely for

counter-terrorism purposes and not by Local Councils for spying on individuals for minor

contraventions of the law.

Why is this idea important?

Amend the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 200 to ensure that it is used solely for

counter-terrorism purposes and not by Local Councils for spying on individuals for minor

contraventions of the law.

Stop snooping

Stop council officers and anyone without a warrant from spying on people with cameras, phone-taps etc. I'm a law-abiding person – leave me alone and stop prying!

Why is this idea important?

Stop council officers and anyone without a warrant from spying on people with cameras, phone-taps etc. I'm a law-abiding person – leave me alone and stop prying!

TAXI AND PRIVATE HIRE CCTV SOUTHAMPTO

IT HAS BEEN MADE COMPULSORY TO HAVE CAMERAS FITTED IN ALL VEHICLE LICENCED BY SOUTHAMPTON CITY COUNCIL THESE INCLUDE CHAUFFEUR DRIVEN VEHICLES.IT IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF PEOPLES PRIVACY AND LIBERTIES, WE CANNOT BE LICENCED UNLESS CCTVS ARE FITTED (PARTLY GOVERNMENT FUNDED) WE NOW STAND TO LOSE CONTRACTS BY COMPANIES WHO WE HAVE BEEN DRIVING FOR OVER 16 YEARS CARRYING VIP'S  AND BUSINESS CLIENTS THE CCTVS PHOTOGRAPH AND VOCALLY RECORD EVERYTHING. PLEASE STOP THIS INTRUSIVE LEGISLATION NOW!!

Why is this idea important?

IT HAS BEEN MADE COMPULSORY TO HAVE CAMERAS FITTED IN ALL VEHICLE LICENCED BY SOUTHAMPTON CITY COUNCIL THESE INCLUDE CHAUFFEUR DRIVEN VEHICLES.IT IS AN INFRINGEMENT OF PEOPLES PRIVACY AND LIBERTIES, WE CANNOT BE LICENCED UNLESS CCTVS ARE FITTED (PARTLY GOVERNMENT FUNDED) WE NOW STAND TO LOSE CONTRACTS BY COMPANIES WHO WE HAVE BEEN DRIVING FOR OVER 16 YEARS CARRYING VIP'S  AND BUSINESS CLIENTS THE CCTVS PHOTOGRAPH AND VOCALLY RECORD EVERYTHING. PLEASE STOP THIS INTRUSIVE LEGISLATION NOW!!

Repeal or Amend ‘ RIPA’ (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act)

Under anti-terrorist laws the powers of Covert Surveillance was extended to a large range of State organizations, including Local Councils. Even organizations to which you may owe money to.

The threshold of who can authorize surveillance is considerably lowered; Previously these powers could only be authorized by Senior officers in Police and Security Services and the Home Secretary.

The purposes for which it can be used for have been greatly extended

Councils have been using these powers in a major way for a whole range of low level crimes and misdemeanours (Even ‘Dog Fouling’ ) . I am sure you have read other stories in the Press.
 

One family was watched for a month, by Council agents from  cars, filmed, schedule recorded, followed on the School Run etc. Why? To make sure that they weren’t cheating on their School Application Form.
 

The offending article is literally two lines in a paragraph. (Sorry but I lost the files on my Laptop so you will have to check it out yourself.)
It truly is The Devil In the Detail.

Without Repealing or Amending this section of the Bill it is a waste of time.The relevant bill is named; ‘Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act’ (RIPA)


Ministers saying ,it should be regulated better will not make the fundamental change necessary. After all, regulations can change at whim, but laws are much harder to change.

 

.


 

Why is this idea important?

Under anti-terrorist laws the powers of Covert Surveillance was extended to a large range of State organizations, including Local Councils. Even organizations to which you may owe money to.

The threshold of who can authorize surveillance is considerably lowered; Previously these powers could only be authorized by Senior officers in Police and Security Services and the Home Secretary.

The purposes for which it can be used for have been greatly extended

Councils have been using these powers in a major way for a whole range of low level crimes and misdemeanours (Even ‘Dog Fouling’ ) . I am sure you have read other stories in the Press.
 

One family was watched for a month, by Council agents from  cars, filmed, schedule recorded, followed on the School Run etc. Why? To make sure that they weren’t cheating on their School Application Form.
 

The offending article is literally two lines in a paragraph. (Sorry but I lost the files on my Laptop so you will have to check it out yourself.)
It truly is The Devil In the Detail.

Without Repealing or Amending this section of the Bill it is a waste of time.The relevant bill is named; ‘Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act’ (RIPA)


Ministers saying ,it should be regulated better will not make the fundamental change necessary. After all, regulations can change at whim, but laws are much harder to change.

 

.


 

Reduce spying on us in the street

We need less survellance of the general public by CCTV cameras as thr UK is the most watched society in the world. I for one feel uncomfortable that I am being contantly monitored even in ordinary residential streets when there seems to be little evidence that any of this actually deters or helps solve much crime or anti social behaviour.

Meanwhile and very ironically as a photographer I have been challenged by police for daring to take photographs of buildings (not even people) as part of my hobby.

 

Why is this idea important?

We need less survellance of the general public by CCTV cameras as thr UK is the most watched society in the world. I for one feel uncomfortable that I am being contantly monitored even in ordinary residential streets when there seems to be little evidence that any of this actually deters or helps solve much crime or anti social behaviour.

Meanwhile and very ironically as a photographer I have been challenged by police for daring to take photographs of buildings (not even people) as part of my hobby.

 

liberties

Remove the right for anyone to film people in their private property for any use against them in a court of law or for media purposes, the right to defend yourself property and family with extreme force, free legal guidance at all times not just for the criminals or foreigners.  British people to have the first choice of all jobs available before any other nationalities

Why is this idea important?

Remove the right for anyone to film people in their private property for any use against them in a court of law or for media purposes, the right to defend yourself property and family with extreme force, free legal guidance at all times not just for the criminals or foreigners.  British people to have the first choice of all jobs available before any other nationalities

End All Forms Of Arbitrary Surveillance

I simply propose that there should be an outright ban on arbitrary surveillance of the population without evidence leading to suspicion of a crime.

This includes, but is not limited to:

Why is this idea important?

I simply propose that there should be an outright ban on arbitrary surveillance of the population without evidence leading to suspicion of a crime.

This includes, but is not limited to: