Remove GPDO Rights for Mobile Telecommunication Companies.

My idea is that the present government should remove Permitted Development Rights for Mobile Phone Operators and make all telecommunication applications go through  full planning procedure.The present GPDO system puts MPO companies as 'Statutory Undertakers' alongside Gas & Electricity – this is unfair.

As the majority of the mobile network was completed by Dec. 2007, having being facilitated by the then Government, now is the time to restore fairness into the planning system by leveling the playing field. I believe that the operators are already having to use full planning in some parts of the UK.

Also, I would like to see LEA's making more use of wired computer systems in schools.

Why is this idea important?

My idea is that the present government should remove Permitted Development Rights for Mobile Phone Operators and make all telecommunication applications go through  full planning procedure.The present GPDO system puts MPO companies as 'Statutory Undertakers' alongside Gas & Electricity – this is unfair.

As the majority of the mobile network was completed by Dec. 2007, having being facilitated by the then Government, now is the time to restore fairness into the planning system by leveling the playing field. I believe that the operators are already having to use full planning in some parts of the UK.

Also, I would like to see LEA's making more use of wired computer systems in schools.

Remove Core Telecoms Infrastructure Away From BT

When BT was privatised, a large amount of public asset, namely the telecoms arm of the GPO passed over to the private sector. This then duly benefitted those who were able to purchase shares in BT.

When the Gas and Electricity markets were deregulated. A new company called Transco was created to handle the infrastructure.

There should be an organization similar to Transco for the country's telecoms infrastructure. Openreach does not fill this criteria as it is ultimately owned by BT.

Why is this idea important?

When BT was privatised, a large amount of public asset, namely the telecoms arm of the GPO passed over to the private sector. This then duly benefitted those who were able to purchase shares in BT.

When the Gas and Electricity markets were deregulated. A new company called Transco was created to handle the infrastructure.

There should be an organization similar to Transco for the country's telecoms infrastructure. Openreach does not fill this criteria as it is ultimately owned by BT.

Covert survailance via Regulation of Investigatory powers act

This act gives the power for the government to request any infomation from telecommunications services, and makes it a criminal offense to tell anyone about it.

Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
Article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

"The government can demand that a public telecommunications service intercepts an individual's communications
The act's "interception warrants" can be served for purposes of "national security", "preventing or detecting serious crime" or "safeguarding the economic well-being of the UK". These (undefined) terms are so vague as to be applicable to just about anyone.

For example, the communications of businessmen negotiating deals with foreign companies could easily fall under "safeguarding of the economic well-being of the UK" within the plain English meaning of the term.

The definition of public telecommunications services is broad and could apply to internet services providers, phone companies, or even someone running a web site.

When an ISP is served with an interception warrant, it has to comply and it may not reveal this fact to anyone ever. "

Reference:

http://www.magnacartaplus.org/bills/rip/#interception

Why is this idea important?

This act gives the power for the government to request any infomation from telecommunications services, and makes it a criminal offense to tell anyone about it.

Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
Article 8(1) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

"The government can demand that a public telecommunications service intercepts an individual's communications
The act's "interception warrants" can be served for purposes of "national security", "preventing or detecting serious crime" or "safeguarding the economic well-being of the UK". These (undefined) terms are so vague as to be applicable to just about anyone.

For example, the communications of businessmen negotiating deals with foreign companies could easily fall under "safeguarding of the economic well-being of the UK" within the plain English meaning of the term.

The definition of public telecommunications services is broad and could apply to internet services providers, phone companies, or even someone running a web site.

When an ISP is served with an interception warrant, it has to comply and it may not reveal this fact to anyone ever. "

Reference:

http://www.magnacartaplus.org/bills/rip/#interception