Snooper's Charter being smuggled into the counter terrorism and security bill

TheTruth1983 · 26/01/15 - 09:31

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2015/01/26/comment-they-re-smuggling-the-snoopers-charter-into-law-but

No debate, no commons vote. It is being sneaked in the back door

It was beaten back only a couple of years ago, but the infamous snoopers charter is being sneaked in to the counter-terrorism and security bill, with a brief debate in the House of Lords later today. The debate was only announced only last week. The House of Commons will get no say, unless enough Lords turn up today and vote it down. On such short notice, it's going to be tight.

The amendment tabled last week is essentially a photocopy of the controversial draft communications data bill, which was killed off by the Liberal Democrats in 2013.

The cross-party quartet of peers behind its reincarnation, each with backgrounds in defence and counter-terrorism, say they want the new powers in place before the general election in May, arguing the threat from Isis and al-Qaeda precipitates a quick response.

Where the hell are mainstream media on this?

paulschapman · 26/01/15 - 10:04

TheTruth1983 wrote: »

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2015/01/26/comment-they-re-smuggling-the-snoopers-charter-into-law-but

No debate, no commons vote. It is being sneaked in the back door

Where the hell are mainstream media on this?

Asleep - as they were when Labour tried to sneak in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legislative_and_Regulatory_Reform_Act_2006 or for that matter the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_Contingencies_Act_2004 (OK they were more concerned with the cuddly fluffy foxes).

Either that or they are complicit - which to be honest is way more frightening.

TheTruth1983 · 26/01/15 - 10:08

Whatever your stance on the Snoopers Charter and whatever your political affiliation, this is an egregious breach of the parliamentary process. If it goes through, democracy takes a big hit in the UK and the right to privacy disappears.

TheTruth1983 · 26/01/15 - 16:37

Being debated now in the Lords

http://www.bbc.com/news/live/uk-politics-30985783

StalwartUK · 26/01/15 - 16:58

Using every trick in the book I see.

TheTruth1983 · 26/01/15 - 17:00

StalwartUK wrote: »

Using every trick in the book I see.

Yep, no cliche is being left unsaid

TheTruth1983 · 26/01/15 - 17:06

Pro Snoopers Charter peer accuses opponents of "emotive claptrap" and then, in effect, says: what about the children? Priceless.

Doctor_Wibble · 26/01/15 - 17:32

TheTruth1983 wrote: »

Pro Snoopers Charter peer accuses opponents of "emotive claptrap" and then, in effect, says: what about the children? Priceless.

Not entirely surprising because the timing of these things is always carefully planned, e.g. Sky suddenly deciding just very recently that they will do that filter thing which somehow suddenly became very urgent. Oh wait no, surely pure coincidence...?

Of course they aren't the same thing but it's handy to have something nearby to grab if you need to create some confusion and be able to deny something not actually said - they tried that one with the data retention regs and an earlier snoopers charter so it's not like there isn't precedent...

Iggyman · 27/01/15 - 09:57

so it looks like this has been booted out:

"However at the end of the debate Lord King withdrew the cross-party amendment calling for the insertion of the snooper’s charter into the current counter-terror bill. But he added that he is likely to press the issue to a vote at next week’s report stage of the bill."

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jan/26/peer-lord-king-snoopers-charter

But does the part that I've put in bold text means they'll try again???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-politics-30985783

Doctor_Wibble · 27/01/15 - 10:20

I don't understand how an amendment that has been withdrawn can be brought back for a vote - either it's withdrawn or it isn't...? Something to add to the list of parliamentary stuff I don't understand

even if it is something that seems a bit nonsensical.

Probably a deliberate move though - maybe they need to make sure there's enough turning up to support with opponents busy elsewhere on that day...

TheTruth1983 · 27/01/15 - 11:33

Perhaps the amendment has been withdrawn but they still need to vote on the bill itself. That would be my guess.

paulschapman · 03/02/15 - 13:10

Attempt to have it added to report stage has failed

'Snoopers' charter' revival dropped by peers

A cross-party group of peers has dropped a second attempt to add the so-called "snoopers' charter" to the government's counter-terrorism bill.

Lords King, Blair, Carlile and West wanted measures on communications data, rejected by the Lib Dems in 2012, to be included in the bill, saying they were vital tools for combating terrorism.

But they withdrew their amendment and it did not go to a vote.
.
.
.
During the first of two days of report-stage scrutiny, Lord King, a Conservative former defence secretary, said there was a "significant gap," exposed by the recent Paris shootings, which could be plugged by a temporary stop-gap measure.

But he said that without the required support the amendment to add communications data powers was doomed to fail.

He said: "We will lose an opportunity to put in place a temporary stop-gap measure that could have reduced the threat to our nation from terrorism at the present time.

"We just have to pray that we don't pay too high a price for that."

Pizzatheaction · 03/02/15 - 16:00

Tom King still has his snout in the country's affairs?

TheTruth1983 · 03/02/15 - 16:01

paulschapman wrote: »

Attempt to have it added to report stage has failed

'Snoopers' charter' revival dropped by peers

Thank Christ.

How long before another attempt is made? Place your bets.

Hey there!

Quick Links

Snooper's Charter being smuggled into the counter terrorism and security bill

Comments