Details of new ‘snooper’s charter’ are being hidden to gag dissenters


Apparently the Conservative Government is trying to limit argument against its new ‘snooper’s charter’ by refusing to tell anybody what it proposes.

In those circumstances, why not just refuse to support it until the details are revealed?

After all, you wouldn’t eat a bowl of soup without knowing what’s in it – why swallow this?

Here’s what The Guardian has to say:

The home secretary, Theresa May, has refused to share with law enforcement agencies or communications companies the full details of her new “snooper’s charter”, raising fresh fears that she is seeking to limit dissent in order to steamroller the controversial laws through parliament.

The revelation, contained in a report into the future of surveillance legislation published by David Anderson QC, the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, was described as “extraordinary” by the recently retired leader of the Association of Chief Police Officers, Sir Hugh Orde.

The original communications data bill, known as the “snooper’s charter”, was blocked by the former deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg, three years ago. It would have required internet companies to track and log users’ web history for a year to allow access by police and security services. The Conservatives had been working on a revamped bill to be implemented in the event of a majority Tory administration.

Anderson, however, reports that, because of the political impasse, there has been “very little consultation between government, law enforcement and service providers for more than two years”. He adds: “In particular, the communication service providers have not been shown the text of the revised draft bill that was prepared in early 2013; the National Crime Agency does not believe it has seen the final draft text; and I was myself refused permission to share it (or even a summary of it) with them …

“Law enforcement itself wishes to reserve its detailed position on these proposals pending further discussions with a government that has a political mandate to take it forward.”

Follow me on Twitter: @MidWalesMike

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have enjoyed this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


13 thoughts on “Details of new ‘snooper’s charter’ are being hidden to gag dissenters

  1. crazytrucker1951

    To see if they’re really on the ball in every email I send I try to insert the words, Bomb, Allah and Camoron,I used to use Bush but as he’s now in well earned obscurity thought I’d try Camoron instead, or perhaps if I spelt his name correctly the forces of law and order may come bashing on my door?

  2. hayfords

    I voted for the government as did millions of others. I expected this sort of surveillance activity and I am happy with it. It is necessary for our general security. If the details are publicised then the target of the monitoring will be forewarned. We have oversight committees who can check the activities of the government on a continuous basis.

      1. hayfords

        The government reading my emails or collecting the email addresses is not a problem or even monitoring my phone calls. Don’t forget that they only actually bother to read emails belonging to potential wrongdoers. It is too big a task to read them all. It is a bit like getting junk mail and some people’s reaction to it. There are few less important things than getting a bit of extra mail. As with monitoring email; where’s the harm.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        Everything from “Don’t forget” is just your opinion and somewhat naïve (in mine). However, if you’re happy to have people compiling dossiers on you, your interests and activities, that’s your business.

      3. hayfords

        I am sure the governmenovernment has a dossier on me already. This is my 50th year in IT. I have signed the official secrets act several times and been security vetted. I can asure you that there is no mass surveillance of emails based on suspect words as the task is far too big (hundreds of thousands of emails a second sent). There are far more sophisticated methods. The data is kept and only looked at when a connection to other suspects is found. Worrying about your personal privacy is mainly paranoia.

      4. thelovelywibblywobblyoldlady

        Well hayfords we could be twins … except I’m Labour and you’re (obviously) tory. I’ve been vetted to counter terrorist level, I too have signed the official secrets act. I certainly DO NOT think worrying about your personal privacy is paranoia. I make this statement based on personal experience … my book; code of misconduct (about my interaction with he police) explains it all!

    1. John Gaines

      So, the political filth who allowed every smelly terrorist who could be bothered into this Country, the easiest Borders in the World to protect, and even paid them Benefits, now expect us to accept slavery by surrendering our ‘Privacy’ and even again to pay through the Nose for the privilege.

      I saw this in action in NI over some tours, my dumbest squaddie had more intelligence, (native cunning) than the so-called Intelligence briefs, which by the by was a total failure, we ended up buying them off, which we should have done in the first place.

      1. hayfords

        Our borders do help us maintain security and immigration. Germany has almost twice the number of foreign born residents that we do and they take the most asylum seekers. We are fourth in the rankings. If you look at the number as a proportion of population then we are way down the list. Norway has as almost the highest proportion and they are not in the EU. They have a free trade agreement as we would have if we left the EU. If we left the EU and had a free trade agreement, we would have to sign up to free movement of people.

  3. bob archer.

    Looks like they have already started limiting any opposition to their plans, as my comments over the last week have mysteriously disappeared.

  4. Thomas

    Most of what I put online is things like roleplays, sapient pony fics and the like, stuff that the secret service would find rather dull.

Comments are closed.