U.K. Surveillance Powers Are 'Illegal', Rules E.U.'s Highest Court

[mateytate]

What did you vote for exactly?

£350 million a week going to the NHS?
Border Control?
Not having to pay any cash to the EU?
A few less immigrants taking all the jobs that nobody wanted to do in the first place?

All of that was complete bollox.

Because the Remain camp only spoke the truth? Come on, give it a rest. Everyone knew both sides were spouting crap, and they certainly were.

I find Brexit all quite amusing as someone who now lives in the US, though living here I now have other worries..

 

[Kaspersky]

Sooner or later U.S.A. gonna pay a high price for spying every single soul in the world and I'll LMFAO.
U.K. is gonna face the charges first, leaving EU will make everybody hates them.

 

[Porco]

Legal or illegal I think the snooper's charter is a disgusting invasion of privacy and government overreach for the vast majority of people, and won't even be very effective for its stated purposes (if you believe that's what it's for, which I'm not wholly convinced it is).

 

[Phil A.]

When the list of institutions that will have access to our data under this horrendous law include such luminaries of national security as

• Food Standards Agency
• Gambling Commission
• Food Standards Scotland
• HMRC

I think it's clear that this is about a lot more than "protecting" us from the bogeyman (full list here)

 

[niun]

Because the Remain camp only spoke the truth? Come on, give it a rest. Everyone knew both sides were spouting crap, and they certainly were.

I find Brexit all quite amusing as someone who now lives in the US, though living here I now have other worries..

See my other post.

 

[captain cadet]

Steady now E.U.
The people of England (outside of major cities) have spoken and decided we'd like to become a soviet style snooper state that banishes basic human rights.

We havent voted to leave the European court of Human Rights. They still would come to the same conclusion anyway

 

[derek4484]

Pretty sure the UK doesnt give a hoot. The EU has no authority in the UK and this is precisely why people in the UK wanted out. They want to govern themselves, not be governed by spaniards, french, dutch, germans, etc.

 

[Scottsoapbox]

Sometimes I f**king hate this stupid country and it's ridiculous government. I didn't vote for Brexit and I didn't vote for Theresa May...what part of this is democracy?

You realize Democracy is majority rule not just you rule, right?

 

[Jsameds]

The undemocractic part is where a campaign of lies and misinformation that garnered the vote of 37% of the electorate in an advisory and non-binding referendum is allowed to inflict massive damaging change on the 63% who didn't vote for Brexit.

Sorry, but if they didn't vote that's nobody's fault but their own. As for the lies, this was spread from both sides.

You're just upset you didn't get the result you wanted.

 

[NoNothing]

We you complain about our democracy here in the US you get plenty of the deniers that shout you down, that its not a democracy, that the US is a republic. This of course is supposed to suave all manner of injustices, like the one we just had with the electoral college voting in trump. Our governments have run amuck!
Anything we can do to put the brakes on these governmental power grabs is a step in the right direction.

What a sad post. It is true, we do not live in a democracy but a representative republic. Most people spouting for democracy barely understand the impact and meaning IMO (your case in point).

Democracy is better known as "mob rule" where all it takes is the majority of people to feel one way or the other and the law/policy goes that way without question. This isn't being a denier, it is being a realist with an understanding of policy, politics and governance.

 

[big-ted]

Pretty sure the UK doesnt give a hoot. The EU has no authority in the UK and this is precisely why people in the UK wanted out. They want to govern themselves, not be governed by spaniards, french, dutch, germans, etc.

Think you got something the wrong way round, the UK is the only member of the EU that follows the rules, everyone else cheats

 

[MacsRgr8]

Sometimes I f**king hate this stupid country and it's ridiculous government. I didn't vote for Brexit and I didn't vote for Theresa May...what part of this is democracy?

I never voted going into the EU.

That's democracy: Others did.

 

[niun]

We havent voted to leave the European court of Human Rights. They still would come to the same conclusion anyway

Can they change laws?

 

[TechZeke]

Erm the former? I didn't vote for brexit either, but to call brexit undemocratic is slightly moronic. A free democratic vote was carried out and the leavers won?

People in the US were bitching about the Electoral College because Hillary won the popular vote.

People in the UK are bitching about a pure democratic popular vote referendum.

People bitch either way.

People need to get over it. Bitching about it doesn't change the outcome.

 

[lowendlinux]

But the price for that model is potentially conflicting mandates, e.g. a Republican-controlled Congress and a Democrat President, which have to work together to pass legislation. More power is also concentrated in a single person and they cannot be removed from office unless in exceptional circumstances.

In parliamentary systems, such as the UK, the Government is directly accountable to Parliament. That means that the position of the Prime Minister is also much weaker, they need to have continuing support in Parliament and can be removed from office. That system is a lot more cooperative and less antagonistic. You can already see this with Theresa May, she was coerced into accepting a motion she did not want, before it was formally voted on. A defeat would have undermined her leadership. I think this flexibility is a lot more desirable.

I agree it's more desirable but it can also be more chaotic and a bit more easy to rig.

 

[AngerDanger]

Man, I bet its occupants can't wait for this building to defrag:

 

[AJ5790]

Yes, in the referendum the Leave side won. However, the current polls are mixed, with some suggesting that the number of people wishing to stay is more than those wishing to leave, and others suggesting the opposite. This is such a massive change, not only in regard to economic circumstances, but as well to citizens' rights, that I would have thought it should have required at least a plurality of the people eligible to vote. But alas, those Tories really bolluxed things up by not specifying exactly how the referendum result would be treated. What a fiasco.

And the polls before the vote were mixed. But only one vote actually counts.

 

[NoNothing]

The undemocractic part is where a campaign of lies and misinformation that garnered the vote of 37% of the electorate in an advisory and non-binding referendum is allowed to inflict massive damaging change on the 63% who didn't vote for Brexit.

Sorry, you don't get to consider the people who failed to voice their opinion. You could just as easily say 67% didn't vote for remain. Foolish view.

Personally, I think decisions this big should have required at least a super majority of at least 2/3 or even 3/4. Before you make this step, make sure a massive number of people are thinking the same way. But the UK didn't do it that way.

 

[Apple Knowledge Navigator]

This paranoia makes me sick.

So websites that I've been on are kept on record for a year. So freakin' what? I'm not going to get any letters asking about a pair of socks I viewed on John Lewis, or interrogated over cat videos.

There are far more pressing issues in the world than this.

 

[niun]

But the UK didn't do it that way.

Nor did we have a single plan in place just in case it did go Leave!
Unlike India, the middle east and most other British adventures I don't think this is something we can just fudge together.

Come to think of it. The last time the UK made a great big decision based on mis-information, scaremongering, outright lies and terrible planning that resulted in a decade long mess.. I wonder if there is a pattern here.

 

[NeilHD]

Sorry, you don't get to consider the people who failed to voice their opinion. You could just as easily say 67% didn't vote for remain. Foolish view.

Personally, I think decisions this big should have required at least a super majority of at least 2/3 or even 3/4. Before you make this step, make sure a massive number of people are thinking the same way. But the UK didn't do it that way.

Precisely. This is exactly what should have happened. It should have required a supermajority and a minimum turnout to pass. However that ignores the fact that this was advisory and not legally-binding, and thus the supermajority and minimum turnout was irrelevant as there is no need to actually act on the result.

You are right in that you can't really consider the view of those who didn't vote, but take the example far enough down the line then if only 11 people in the entire country had turned up to vote and we had 6 voting leave and 5 voting remain and we'd still be in the same situation. Also those who don't vote are effectively supporting the status quo, as the referendum was to enact a change. They clearly don't care enough about the change to vote for it, so are therefore not backing the change.

 

[Mr Fusion]

You wrongly equate intelligence with education, everyone who disagrees is dumb!

Oh you can disagree all you want. You're still wrong though.

Could you be any more arrogant? Jeez.

I'm sorry that facts anger you. Fear not, once your EU divorce is finalized you won't have to worry about any of that. Enjoy your surveillance state.

Oh dear, someone's a sore remoaner! Perhaps you'd like another vote?

No thanks, I prefer to stand around and watch when a fool is busy kicking their own a$$.

 

[NeilHD]

This paranoia makes me sick.

So websites that I've been on are kept on record for a year. So freakin' what? I'm not going to get any letters asking about a pair of socks I viewed on John Lewis, or interrogated over cat videos.

There are far more pressing issues in the world than this.

Until your son googles for "bombs" as part of his WWII homework. Followed by your wife searching for Fertiliser, and then your daughter searches for "islamic radicalisation" as part of her RE homework.

And now you've tripped the keywords.

I presume you have no problems with all your phonecalls being recorded, too? Or a state-sanctioned camera in your home? Or the post office reading all your mail before delivering it to you?

 

[LV426]

In response to the CCTV argument, here is the basic rebuttal: those cameras aren't in your home or looking in your windows. They are on public streets and businesses.

The Snooper's Charter gives explicit permission for authorities to hack into computers (e.g. laptops with cameras) and spy right inside your home. Let's call it CCTV+. The UK has been pioneering public surveillance, and it now has the most draconian surveillance laws of any developed nation. Cheers, HM Government.

 

[ksnell]

Steady now E.U.
The people of England (outside of major cities) have spoken and decided we'd like to become a soviet style snooper state that banishes basic human rights.

But wouldn't the alternative be a Soviet style satellite state as part of the EU?

Not saying I agree with your new law. I am 100% for privacy.