Ever & ever closer to 1984, yet no one sees it...

Bring back Mrs. T!

Further to my serious and well-founded concerns that the UK government is on a mission to turn Britain into a full-scale Orwellian police state, where movement, freedom & even thoughts are controlled, the government now plans a register, where all our travel is monitored & stored, and when necessary, used against us.


Next step: The Exit Visa - I bet we'll need to apply for, and pay for one of these each time we want to leave the UK, or maybe even our own part of the UK.

I hate to say it, but most of what I've forecast has come to pass....

• ID Cards
• DNA Database
• Surveillance Society & CCTV
• Biometric Passports
• Loss of the right to travel - it only has to be requested
• Monitoring of phone, email & internet traffic
• Satellite tracking of vehicles

The government is compiling a database to track and store the international travel records of millions of Britons.

 

Computerised records of all 250 million journeys made by individuals in and out of the UK each year will be kept for up to 10 years. The government says the database is essential in the fight against crime, illegal immigration and terrorism. But opposition MPs and privacy campaigners fear it is a significant step towards a surveillance society.

The intelligence centre will store names, addresses, telephone numbers, seat reservations, travel itineraries and credit card details of travellers. 

Big Brother

 

Shadow home secretary Chris Grayling said: "The government seems to be building databases to track more and more of our lives. "The justification is always about security or personal protection. But the truth is that we have a government that just can't be trusted over these highly sensitive issues. We must not allow ourselves to become a Big Brother society."

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said: "This is another example of an intrusive database without any public debate about safeguards on its use. "We are sleepwalking into a surveillance state and should remember that George Orwell's 1984 was a warning, not a blueprint."

A spokesman for campaign group NO2ID said: "When your travel plans, who you are travelling with, where you are going to and when are being recorded you have to ask yourself just how free is this country?"

The e-Borders scheme covers flights, ferries and rail journeys and the Home Office says similar schemes run in other countries including the US, Canada, Spain and Australia. Minister of State for borders and immigration Phil Woolas said the government was determined to ensure the UK's border remained one of the toughest in the world. "Our hi-tech electronic borders system will allow us to count all passengers in and out of the UK and [it] targets those who aren't willing to play by our rules," he said.

"Already e-Borders has screened over 75 million passengers against immigration, customs and police watch-lists, leading to over 2,700 arrests for crimes such as murder, rape and assault."

Where will it all end?

Torchwood.

(Google 'George Orwell, 1984' for a worrying comparison of his fictional view of the UK in 1984, and where we'll possibly be for real, maybe in 2014)

My personal fears - as vocalised by the UK House of Lords

Electronic surveillance and collection of personal data are "pervasive" in British society and threaten to undermine democracy, peers have warned.

 

CCTV cameras and the DNA database were two examples of threats to privacy, the Lords constitution committee said.

It called for compensation for people subject to illegal surveillance. 

The government said CCTV and DNA were "essential" to fight crime but campaign group Liberty said abuses of power mean "even the innocent have a lot to fear".

'Orwellian'

 

Civil liberties campaigners have warned about the risks of a "surveillance society" in which the state acquires ever-greater powers to track people's movements and retain personal data.

Controversial government plans for a database to store details of people's phone calls and e-mails were put on hold late last year after they were branded "Orwellian".

Ministers are consulting on the plan, which would involve the details but not the content of calls and internet traffic being logged, saying it is essential to fighting terrorism.

The Department for Communities and Local Government said it had written to local councils to ask them to ensure surveillance powers were used "proportionately" and not for tackling minor offences such as dog fouling. 

A spokesman said: "It is right and important that councils have these powers of surveillance - they are an effective means of tackling real problems that can blight communities, such as rogue traders, fly tippers and loan sharks.

"But the public must have confidence in who has these powers and that they are used in a proportionate and proper way which is why we are working closely with the home office and local government to develop training and guidance."

In its report, the Lords constitution committee said growth in surveillance by both the state and the private sector risked threatening people's right to privacy, which it said was "an essential pre-requisite to the exercise of individual freedom".

People were often unaware of the scale of personal information held and exchanged by public bodies, it said. "There can be no justification for this gradual but incessant creep towards every detail about us being recorded and pored over by the state," committee chairman and Tory peer Lord Goodlad said.

'Misuse of powers'

 

Among areas of most concern were the growth of CCTV cameras, of which there are now an estimated four million in the UK. The UK is said by privacy campaigners to have the most cameras per head of population in the world, but no definitive figures are available.

According to a 2004 European Commission report, Britain has the highest density of CCTV cameras in Europe. It found 40,000 cameras monitored public areas in 500 British towns and cities, compared to fewer than 100 cameras in 15 German cities and no open street CCTV at all in Denmark.

In its report, the Lords committee said the use of cameras should be regulated on a statutory basis in the UK, with a legally binding code of practice governing their use. There was evidence of abuse of surveillance powers by some councils, with cameras wrongly being "used to spy on the public over issues such as littering".

The UK's DNA database is the "largest in the world", the report concluded, with more than 7% of the population having their samples stored, compared with 0.5% in the US.

Police in England, Wales and Northern Ireland can take DNA and fingerprints from anybody arrested on suspicion of a recordable offence and the samples can be held indefinitely whether people are charged or not. 

Campaigners say anyone not convicted of a crime should have their DNA removed, a position endorsed by the European Court of Human Rights in a recent ruling in the case of two British men.

Ministers should comply with this ruling quickly, peers said, and legislate for a new regulatory framework for the database.

Other recommendations include a requirement for any new data scheme to be preceded by a public assessment of its impact on privacy and for the information commissioner to be given powers to carry out inspections on private companies.

"The huge rise in surveillance and data collection by the state and other organisations risks undermining the long-standing tradition of privacy and individual freedom which are vital for democracy," Lord Goodlad added. "If the public are to trust that information about them is not being improperly used, there should be much more openness about what data is collected, by whom and how it is used."

'Right balance'

 

The government said CCTV and DNA were "essential crime fighting tools" but acknowledged personal data should only be used in criminal investigations where necessary. "The key is to strike the right balance between privacy, protection and sharing of personal data," a Home Office spokesman said. "This provides law enforcement agencies with the tools to protect the public... while ensuring there are effective safeguards and a solid legal framework to protect civil liberties."

What are your views?

Chris T.