Guy Aitchison (Bristol, OK): I’m often struck by the way in which Government actions that threaten our most basic freedoms and right to privacy slip under the radar of the mainstream media or are blandly and uncritically reported in a way which parrots the official justifications given by the Home Office. This week ministers gave the Metropolitan police access to all 1500 congestion charge cameras, allowing them to track vehicles in “real time”. Spyblog has some interesting discussion of the media coverage. It also points out that what is really being proposed is that real time data on everyone be available to the police and any number of other unknown agencies. Spyblog strongly questions the legality of such a move. Serious questions must also be asked about the lobbying power of organisations like the Met and ACPO in a liberal democracy. The Times reported a statement by Police Minister Tony McNulty that the Met “believes that this is necessary due to the enduring, vehicle-borne terrorist threat to London.” Now this may be the case, but as Criminology Professor Ian Loader puts it in today’s Guardian in relation to terror detention, isn’t it the duty of a democratic government to question, and not blindly champion, shopping lists of powers demanded by the police? Perhaps the acid test for Brown’s Government will be the coming debate over the 90-days.
Meanwhile a sobering reminder of the extent to which the state has gained power over the citizen in recent years is provided by Philip Johnston, assistant editor of the Telegraph. He has written a brilliantly incisive essay (winner of this year’s Charles Douglas Home Memorial Trust Award) which catalogues the Government’s hyperactive law-making and describes the populist authoritarian approach that lies behind it. The essay is called “Are we a free country any more?” and although quite long, it is well worth reading in full.
