Wednesday, 24 May 2017

Had the Tories spent less time trying to steal our private data, maybe they could have focused on preventing terrorism?


The Manchester Arena atrocity couldn't have come at a better time for Theresa May and the Tories.

May was completely falling to pieces over her hated policy of asset stripping people who get ill and need social care, Labour were surging in the polls (especially in Wales) and even the mainstream press were finally holding Theresa May to account over her maliciousness and ineptitude!


Then some horrible bastard killed and maimed dozens of innocent people in Manchester, including several children. Political campaigning was suspended, and Theresa May and her bumbling Home Secretary Amber Rudd could spend the following day strutting around, looking important and doing COBR meetings instead of floundering about ineptly trying to defend their horrific Dementia Tax.

Since campaigning was suspended I decided to give it a day until I asked the vital question:

What could the Tory government have done differently in order to prevent this sickening attack?


If you're the kind of person who pays attention to what your government is up to, you'll know that the Tories spent a considerable amount of effort last year on introducing the most extreme state surveillance laws anywhere in the developed world.

The Snoopers' Charter (The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 -to give it it's official name) is an astounding piece of legislation. Not only does it give the state the power to tell lies in court to secure convictions, it also gives over 20,000 state employees the ability to go trawling through all of our private communications data.

Freedom of information requests have revealed that thousands of state employees at dozens of non-terrorism related state agencies (such as the Gambling Commission, the Health and Safety Executive, and the Food Standards Agency) have been empowered to snoop on us.

The question now, in light of the appalling terrorist attacks in Westminster and Manchester that have happened since the Snoopers' Charter came into force, is was this snooping law an effective use of time and resources?

Instead of focusing their efforts on ensuring that a load of people at the Food Standards Agency can now access your private communications data, maybe the government could have done something that would have actually helped to prevent these appalling terrorist attacks?

This isn't political point scoring. It's a legitimate line of enquiry.

Both of the horrifying attacks in Westminster and Manchester happened under this Tory government. And both of them happened after their flagship state snooping policy became law in November 2016.

Asking how these awful attacks happened, and what the government could have done differently to prevent them are legitimate questions.

These are legitimate questions that the mainstream media should be asking (instead of crudely and dishonestly smearing the opposition party leader in order to help Theresa May back into power).


I think it's legitimate to conclude that if the Tories had expended less time and resources on their obsession with accessing our private communications data, and some more time and resources on measures that would actually help to prevent terrorism, then perhaps these terrible attacks might have been prevented?

 Another Angry Voice  is a "Pay As You Feel" website. You can have access to all of my work for free, or you can choose to make a small donation to help me keep writing. The choice is entirely yours.




OR

Post a Comment