Kitman 2204 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 From the Beeb: Councils in England and Wales have used controversial spying laws 10,000 times in the past five years, figures obtained by the Liberal Democrats show. The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa) was meant to fight terrorism and serious crime. But officials have been using it to spy on suspected dog fouling, littering and other minor offences. The government has promised curbs on its use but the Lib Dems warn it could still become a "snoopers' charter". The figures, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, reveal for the first time how widespread the use of Ripa is among council officials in England and Wales. A survey of more than 180 local authorities found: • 1,615 council staff have the power to authorise the use of Ripa. • 21% (or 340) of these staff are below senior management grade. • Ripa powers have been used 10,333 times in the last five years. • Just 9% of these authorisations have led to a successful prosecution, caution or fixed-penalty notice The Lib Dems are calling on the government to ensure that Ripa powers are only used where strictly necessary and that their use is sanctioned by magistrates. New guidelines The party's local government spokesman Julia Goldsworthy said: "This government has seen civil liberties as little more than a temporary inconvenience. "Slowly but surely freedoms have been eroded and we're now in a situation where dog fouling is considered sufficient to warrant surveillance by council officials. "When Ripa was passed only nine organisations, including the police and security services, were allowed to use it. Now a total of 795 bodies including all 475 local authorities can use powers that were originally designed to prevent terrorism." The government is planning to issue new guidelines to councils on the use of Ripa. In November, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said it should not be used to snoop on people suspected of minor offences such as dog fouling or putting out rubbish on the wrong day. But she defended councils' right to use the powers against suspected rogue traders or fly-tippers. Ms Smith wants applications for the use of Ripa to go to the top of organisations, such as the chief executive of a council rather than the head of trading standards or environmental health. The Conservatives say they would restrict the use of Ripa powers by local authorities only to crimes which could lead to a prison sentence. Local councils would also require judicial approval for the use of surveillance powers and council leaders would have to sign off each use of the powers, under Tory proposals. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- A perfect illustration, if one were needed, of why you can't trust organisations with sweeping powers. They just can't help abusing them for whatever floats their boat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeordieMessiah 2 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 A perfect explanation of why this government needs to be booted out on its arse pronto and replaced by a military junta. Halfway house measures never work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrew 4713 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 It's that bit off have I got news for you opening thing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted March 26, 2009 Author Share Posted March 26, 2009 A perfect explanation of why this government needs to be booted out on its arse pronto and replaced by a military junta. Halfway house measures never work. Yes. If you're going to trample on someone's rights you might as well be upfront about it Snooping, stealth taxes and pointless wars - Labour's legacy to the nation. And nervous dogs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted March 26, 2009 Author Share Posted March 26, 2009 No doubt there'll be some attractive women who need to be carefully photographed by council employees. Just to make sure they don't shit on the pavement. Better safe than sorry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 A perfect illustration, if one were needed, of why you can't trust organisations with sweeping powers. They just can't help abusing them for whatever floats their boat. It's all left wing "social policy", so it's fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 These are probably the last people that should to be allowed to wield this sort of power. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Sick. Just incredible shoddy legislation like most of the legislation New Labour has brought in, what it should and should not be used for should have been tied down initially. What always worries me with legislation like this is when unindented effects are liked by the Government (e.g. DNA database) and then built upon in ways that they'd never have got through Parliament IF they'd been proposed for that reason in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Sick. Just incredible shoddy legislation like most of the legislation New Labour has brought in, what it should and should not be used for should have been tied down initially. What always worries me with legislation like this is when unindented effects are liked by the Government (e.g. DNA database) and then built upon in ways that they'd never have got through Parliament IF they'd been proposed for that reason in the first place. Don't they employ analysts/legals to show how to get stealth legislation through? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Sick. Just incredible shoddy legislation like most of the legislation New Labour has brought in, what it should and should not be used for should have been tied down initially. What always worries me with legislation like this is when unindented effects are liked by the Government (e.g. DNA database) and then built upon in ways that they'd never have got through Parliament IF they'd been proposed for that reason in the first place. Don't they employ analysts/legals to show how to get stealth legislation through? Yup, and I honestly think an awful lot of terror law was aimed at other things, just in this case even the Government have genuinely been embarrassed and surprised at quite how far it's gone. It's hard to make a case for draconian laws to combat the terror menace of dog- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChezGiven 0 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Apparently we spend 10m a day on counter-terrorist activity in the UK. Thats a lot of cash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Park Life 71 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 Apparently we spend 10m a day on counter-terrorist activity in the UK. Thats a lot of cash. ...and a complete waste of fucking money. Just get MI5 to pay attention next time they meet their informers for a coffee, unlike last time.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 I kind of wish I could get as indignant as you lot, but frankly I've no faith in the system anymore so couldn't really give a shit who's in charge, Labour, Tory, Lib Dem... they're all shit. It's wrong and blinkered and ignorant, but I'm content in my "I'm all right Jack" state of mind these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted March 26, 2009 Author Share Posted March 26, 2009 I find it ironic that "celebrities" self-righteously fight for the right to privacy notwithstanding their lack oif privacy is due to their own demented self promotion and vanity. On the other hand Joe Public, the vast majority of whom peacefully go about their business, are relentlessly filmed, snapped, pried and snooped on because they are not to be trusted and must be treated like naughty children about to commit a crime. In the new Britain privacy is the preserve of the elite. Screw your rights; pavements must be clean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tooner 243 Posted March 26, 2009 Share Posted March 26, 2009 No doubt there'll be some attractive women who need to be carefully photographed by council employees. Just to make sure they don't shit on the pavement. Better safe than sorry. you could make some serious cash on the photos of them shitting..... tbh....lower taxes as a result......i'm just sayin' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kitman 2204 Posted March 26, 2009 Author Share Posted March 26, 2009 No doubt there'll be some attractive women who need to be carefully photographed by council employees. Just to make sure they don't shit on the pavement. Better safe than sorry. you could make some serious cash on the photos of them shitting..... tbh....lower taxes as a result......i'm just sayin' You don't work for the council by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I find it ironic that "celebrities" self-righteously fight for the right to privacy notwithstanding their lack oif privacy is due to their own demented self promotion and vanity. On the other hand Joe Public, the vast majority of whom peacefully go about their business, are relentlessly filmed, snapped, pried and snooped on because they are not to be trusted and must be treated like naughty children about to commit a crime. In the new Britain privacy is the preserve of the elite. Screw your rights; pavements must be clean. That will be even more so if Mosley gets his way, and he just might he has the right combination of no shame, wealth and influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I kind of wish I could get as indignant as you lot, but frankly I've no faith in the system anymore so couldn't really give a shit who's in charge, Labour, Tory, Lib Dem... they're all shit. It's wrong and blinkered and ignorant, but I'm content in my "I'm all right Jack" state of mind these days. And then they came for the unemployed comedy night promoters, but I did not speak up, because I was not an unemployed comedy night promoter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I kind of wish I could get as indignant as you lot, but frankly I've no faith in the system anymore so couldn't really give a shit who's in charge, Labour, Tory, Lib Dem... they're all shit. It's wrong and blinkered and ignorant, but I'm content in my "I'm all right Jack" state of mind these days. And then they came for the unemployed comedy night promoters, but I did not speak up, because I was not an unemployed comedy night promoter ... but I am an unemployed comedy night promoter... I absolutely agree that apathy is bad... but I just can't care. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I kind of wish I could get as indignant as you lot, but frankly I've no faith in the system anymore so couldn't really give a shit who's in charge, Labour, Tory, Lib Dem... they're all shit. It's wrong and blinkered and ignorant, but I'm content in my "I'm all right Jack" state of mind these days. And then they came for the unemployed comedy night promoters, but I did not speak up, because I was not an unemployed comedy night promoter ... but I am an unemployed comedy night promoter... I know you are. I'm not, however Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Fish 10663 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 I kind of wish I could get as indignant as you lot, but frankly I've no faith in the system anymore so couldn't really give a shit who's in charge, Labour, Tory, Lib Dem... they're all shit. It's wrong and blinkered and ignorant, but I'm content in my "I'm all right Jack" state of mind these days. And then they came for the unemployed comedy night promoters, but I did not speak up, because I was not an unemployed comedy night promoter ... but I am an unemployed comedy night promoter... I know you are. I'm not, however Ah, I see your point. I think I'll stick to what I'm good at. Elvis impressions and what not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 Dirty pavements have more affect on my life than terrorism ever will (touch wood), crack on I say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fop 1 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 Dirty pavements have more affect on my life than terrorism ever will (touch wood), crack on I say. The worst bit is even with full on anti-terror powers their detection rate of say dog fouling is less than 10%. Not only is it wrong, they are shit at it too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Douggy B 0 Posted March 27, 2009 Share Posted March 27, 2009 Dirty pavements have more affect on my life than terrorism ever will (touch wood), crack on I say. The worst bit is even with full on anti-terror powers their detection rate of say dog fouling is less than 10%. Not only is it wrong, they are sh!t at it too. I think your ramblings on here are interfering with their sh!t detectors. They never had a chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now