New Statesman – Leader: Labour must once more become the party of liberalism

There are dissident, decentralising strands in Labour thinking, and it is time these were rediscovered.

The first Queen’s Speech of this new government promises to light the bonfire of New Labour’s authoritarian vanities. The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition’s pledge to “restore freedoms and civil liberties through the abolition of identity cards and repeal of unnecessary laws” is not only to be welcomed, but sets a challenge to the half- dozen candidates who would be Labour’s next leader.

The centrepiece of this attempt to repair some of the damage wreaked by the legislative mania of Labour in power is the Freedom (or “Great Repeal”) Bill. This will begin to dismantle the “database state” that historians will judge the most disastrous legacy, other than the Iraq war, of the New Labour years. It is right to abandon the ID card scheme, the National Identity Register and the ContactPoint database. There is not, and never was (not even when the anti-terrorist emergency was at its most pressing), any plausible, principled argument for placing such constraints on individual liberty.

There are dissident, decentralising strands in Labour thinking, and it is time these were rediscovered.The first Queen’s Speech of this new government promises to light the bonfire of New Labour’s authoritarian vanities. The Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition’s pledge to “restore freedoms and civil liberties through the abolition of identity cards and repeal of unnecessary laws” is not only to be welcomed, but sets a challenge to the half- dozen candidates who would be Labour’s next leader.
The centrepiece of this attempt to repair some of the damage wreaked by the legislative mania of Labour in power is the Freedom (or “Great Repeal”) Bill. This will begin to dismantle the “database state” that historians will judge the most disastrous legacy, other than the Iraq war, of the New Labour years. It is right to abandon the ID card scheme, the National Identity Register and the ContactPoint database. There is not, and never was (not even when the anti-terrorist emergency was at its most pressing), any plausible, principled argument for placing such constraints on individual liberty.

The best of Tom’s list (with an SNP slant ):

• Reform
• Greener economy
• Broken Society
• Keys to Downing Street
• Class war (not so sure this is relevant to this election: aren’t we all aspiring middle class types?)
• Values
• Separatist
• Two-horse race – c.f. “not a two-horse race” from Nick Clegg
• “Alex Salmond can’t become Prime Minister”
• “break up Britain”/”Tear up the Union” (does it merit the capitalisation of a proper noun?)
• SNP “obsessed with independence”. Possibly also “wasting taxpayers’ money on a consultation exercise/referendum bill”
• Minority viewpoint

Amendments already discussed

A light-hearted one to start you off:

Baroness Howe of Idlicote, on why investment in mobile networks is a good idea:

“Equally, the noble Lord, Lord Steel, made a very important point. I, too, live in one of the completely hopeless reception areas. Enough gigabytes need to be available so that the level is acceptable right across the country. I fear that we did not have enough gigabytes in the first place so that we could compete with countries such as Japan and so on. That is one of the problems with which we have to live.”

(6th Jan, Column 149)

Oh noes! We don’t have enough gigabytes!

Some enlightened talk – but full of bombast – from Lord Lucas on trust-busting (during a section about the universal service obligation on broadband providers). He is clearly a long-term BT critic:

“However, as the noble Lord, Lord Mitchell, pointed out, we are facing not a tide but a tsunami-the dam has broken. He outlined a world where there is the growth of apps, to be followed by a decent e-book, at last-I am dead certain that Apple will not produce anything other than that. This will create an enormous change, not only for this part of the Bill but certainly for Clauses 4 onwards. I declare an interest as someone who earns most of his money from selling copyright on the net.

It is wrong to see these things as a threat. They are an enormous opportunity. The way in which to harness an opportunity is not to live with the old monopolists and try to shore them up, doing cosy deals with the big beasts of the industry, but to encourage the underdogs and the people who are motivated to change.”

(6th Jan 2010, Column 159)

Perhaps not to positive on the copyright side, but at least with regard to broadband provision there’s some determination not to hand BT a chunk of change and not keep a tight reign on them. Anyway, Lucas’ amendment was withdrawn.

An attempt to usurp the special place of investment in public service broadcasting by Lord Howard of Rising (amendment 3, here):

“My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendments 4, 6, 7 and 31. These five amendments fall into a few different groups. Amendments 3 and 6 serve two purposes-first, to create a level playing field with respect to investment in media content, and, secondly, to highlight a further concern that this subsection may have on Ofcom’s ability to function properly. By removing the phrase “public service” from this duty, we are attempting to create a level playing field in the media sector.

We on this side of the Committee want to attract investment into UK content in general, rather than just public service content. Without this amendment, such a duty may put off potential investment into the UK media sector, because it would create a fear that Ofcom may intervene to the detriment of those not producing public service content. We do not believe that the state should choose what type of content non-public service broadcasters invest in. Consumers value choice above all else, and these amendments would ensure that this is protected.

(6th Jan 2010, Column 163-164)

Amendments still to be discussed

You can view a full list of amendments to be discussed in the Committee stage at the HoL site. From my (copyright policy) perspective, the most interesting are:

Amendment 33 (Lord Razzall; Lord Clement-Jones):

“Obligations on copyright holders

Copyright holders seeking to take action against subscribers for online copyright infringement must use the process set out in sections 124A to 124E of the Communications Act 2003 except in cases of actual or likely extreme prejudice.”

Amendment 34 (Lord Razzall; Lord Clement-Jones):

“Compliance with fundamental rights

In drafting or amending any code, laying any statutory instrument, or taking any other action under sections 124A to 124L of the Communications Act 2003 or under section 302A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, the Secretary of State must demonstrate before such action is implemented that he has considered whether such action—

(a)  is necessary and proportionate to the goal of protecting and enforcing copyright, and

(b)  that it appropriately balances the interest of rights holders and the interests of the public in due process, privacy, freedom of expression and other fundamental human rights guaranteed by inter alia the European Convention of Human Rights and the EC Charter of Rights.”

Amendment 56 and 57, on introducing a DMCA-style sworn statements to affirm that the accuser owns the copyright concerned and has collected the information legally:

“56 Page 6, line 24, at end insert “; and

(   )  includes a sworn statement by the person making the report that the information collected has been obtained in compliance with all relevant laws, including data protection and privacy laws, and by persons entitled to gather such information”

57 Page 6, line 24, at end insert “; and

(   )  includes a sworn statement and evidence that the person making the report owns the requisite copyright” “

I doubt those last ones will survive the Committee stage.

There are also a number of amendments clarifying the accusing tone of the language, from “infringement” to “infringement allegation”. These can be found throughout the tabled amendments.

The Bill has just been presented for its first reading, and despite the hysterics and some inaccurate reporting from the usual folk, there really is a lot to be concerned here about in terms of copyright policy and civil liberties. The Bill would allow the Secretary of State to make amendments to copyright law by Statutory Instrument, would mandate ISPs to notify (and possibly later disconnect) customers based on mere accusations of copyright infringement on their account, and a few other ill-thought-out measures.

I will be phoning my MP in the next few days to ensure that he votes the Bill down when it is presented in the Commons.

Those wishing to read more of the context of the Bill’s introduction can read Ars Technica’s background piece. You can read the Bill itself, as presented to the Lords, here.

The Faslane naval base on the Clyde is to become home to the UK’s entire nuclear-powered submarine fleet, the BBC understands.

An announcement on the future of the UK’s naval submarines is expected to be made in the House of Commons later.
It is understood that Trafalgar class submarines, currently based in Plymouth, will join the existing Vanguard fleet based at Faslane.
more

It’s a total gift to the SNP, who campaign against nuclear weapons being held in Scotland (and use planning powers to block the construction of new nuclear power stations).

This will come back to haunt Labour.

Overall, I view devolution as a success, and I think that the political process has both encouraged and reflected the diverging political environment between Scotland and the UK as a whole. For me, it has meant a more open, honest political process, some big public health wins (such as the public smoking ban), and most importantly, a greater sense of confidence in Scotland. It has also had its faltering, embarrassing moments, and periods of total farce.

I am curious about further powers, something that almost everyone agrees the Parliament needs.

A referendum on independence for Scotland is planned for next autumn. The Scottish National Party presented the referendum bill against unfavourable parliamentary arithmetic in March (and failed), but it’s likely to re-introduce it at some point. One would hope that the effect of the opposition to the bill would be to add additional options (a three-way poll, including a ‘devolution max’ option as well as independence and the status quo) rather than to prevent the whole enterprise altogether.

Consider this an open thread. What does devolution mean to you? Would independence give Scotland the clout it needs? Is ‘devolution max’ or some kind of more entrenched federalism the way to go?

“GCHQ is not developing technology to enable the monitoring of all internet use and phone calls in Britain, or to target everyone in the UK,” the statement said. “Similarly, GCHQ has no ambitions, expectations or plans for a database or databases to store centrally all communications data in Britain.”

Statement A, revised: The UK government are not planning to build a massive surveillance network to capture the traffic data of all internet users.

Just not all of them simultaneously.

Or so they tell us. I feel so reassured :S

UK laws protecting the privacy of people’s communications are inadequate, the European Commission has said. The Commission has launched a legal case against the UK over its implementation of European Union Directives.

The Commission’s investigation was sparked by outrage over trials by BT of a system which monitors web use and tries to match advertising to people’s perceived interests. The trials were done without BT customers’ knowledge or permission.

The Commission has investigated complaints made to it and to police and has found the UK’s laws inadequate in protecting the privacy of communications.

The UK.gov’s reaction to the Phorm fiasco, and its attitude to privacy in general, is best described by the following lolcat:

So I welcome this intervention, and hope that the UK gets slapped around the face and fined an enormous sum of money.

You can read the full article at out-law.com.

Some of them get cut off at the right-hand side by my site design – just click on each to go the original photo page. All copyright their respective authors.

Minesweeper

Terrorist parents

Paranoid?

Boobie-cam

He's dead.

Washing powder

Boy holding bomb

100%

Crusty tosser

You'll shit bricks.

Very clever, British Transport Police.

Not only does your newspaper advert induce total, irrational paranoia (“BABIES and OLD MEN WITH HATS will be EXPLODED into THOUSANDS of SHAMI CHAKRABARTI SHAPED PIECES if we don’t SPY ON EACH OTHER!”).

It also encourages people to be defensive about CCTV cameras. Because as we all know, CCTV is SO incredibly effective. In using electricity.

Come to think of it, what’s that woman in the brown woolen jumper doing? She’s only keeping up the pretence of chatting to the mother sat next to her. She’s actually STUDYING the CCTV camera. STUDYING it! STUDYING IT! Her hands are obscured because she has a NOTE PAD there. Here’s what it probably says (for the avoidance of doubt, she happens to be a Rastafarian jihadist):

10:53am, 26th February 2009. Crummytown high street. Lat: 50.130304004 N Long 4.3384943 E.

In the service of Ja, I have begun investigations of Crummytown High Street. My reconnaissance suggests that optimal hat-wearing-man destructive density may be achieved by placing the explosives next to the broken-down bubblegum machine outside Boots. They may be disguised as a discarded chip-wrapper, stack of Socialist Workers’ Party leaflets or given to a tramp as a sort of ironic present.

Our secondary objective – the slight de-alignment of the childrens’ merry-go-round – would be best achieved by placing an everlasting gobstopper below the rotating mechanism.

It is suggested that we leave the letter of responsibility attached high up a lamp-post, so as to avoid dogs peeing on it.

11:02am

I have just noticed that there is a CCTV camera on the street, which did not come up during my initial scans. Better cancel our plans for world domination. Les from the council, who watches the cameras,  will surely stop our attack.

I must go, the woman I’m ‘talking to’ is starting to think I’m not listening. Also, I just saw her dial.. Shit. ABORT!

Report your swarthy-looking neighbour today! Being a Good Citizen demands it!

(Note: Yes, I do know that some people genuinely do want to cause harm to others in nasty ways which we might describe as ‘terrorism’. It happened in my city already, and Scotland is very well used to dealing with extremists. But it’s also true that people are very bad at assessing risk, and since the risk of terrorism affecting any given person is extremely low, countless orders of magnitude lower than being hit by a car on the street or dying in an air crash, we probably shouldn’t get carried away, particularly when the advice given is completely pie in the sky and counterproductive. Adverts like this BTP one play on our fears to encourage an illiberal, fearful attitude that makes the abuse of state power, and the persecution of ‘others’, much more feasible, whether we start out with those intentions or not. It’s also a total distraction from the real questions we should be addressing as a society.)

–Update:

To give, um… ‘credit’ where it’s due, this campaign seems to have originated at the Metropolitan Police, though the true source is probably Jacqui Smith, working from her underground bunker beneath Harrods. The resemblance in tone to her latest hair-brained scheme is unmistakable.

First you introduce a raft of illiberal, poorly conceived proposals and laws which turn your population into the most watched democratic society on earth.
THEN, one of your own comrades – His Highness David Blunkett MP, the Maharajah of Daily Mail headline driven reactionary policy-making, no less – comes out and suggests that this might be a bad idea!

Schengen also means that the states involved share a common set of visa rules to external applicants, and a common visa issued in one Schengen state is valid in any other.

Needless to say, it makes a lot of sense. It better reflects personal freedoms of movement granted by EU rights, and from a practical point of view, eliminates passport check queues from a great many flights. Recently, Switzerland joined, and although there are some special issues (e.g. the land border with Liechtenstein, and Switzerland’s non-membership of the EU customs zone), it works very well.

Which makes the UK and Ireland’s positions increasingly curious. They are the only EU member states that have permanent exemptions from the border removal measures. Could things be about to change?

“But Britain’s luck may be on the wane. The political and legal problems associated with its half-in, half-out status are growing. Although the country retains its own border controls, its police officers are allowed to follow criminal suspects into the Schengen area if they are on a surveillance mission. It has also been agreed that the UK’s national police computer can connect to the Schengen-area police database. But the Schengen countries object to either Britain or Ireland having access to valuable data on who is refused entry to the Schengen area, or to having a vote on the board of the EU’s border agency since they do not share the pain of maintaining a common EU border. When Britain tried to challenge this in 2008, the European court of justice (ECJ) ruled in favour of the Schengen countries.”

Nothing will likely change until the Labour Party administration in Westminster get off their security power-trip, but nonetheless, there are some interesting observations in this article.

Read more at the Centre for European Reform.

OH WAIT, WE CAN’T REMOVE THEM.

But we can be Very Very Cross with them, which they will not like (see video).

Bring me the head of ‘unwritten constitutions’. They need a bloody good slap.

The Letter of Last Resort

“At this very moment, miles beneath the surface of the ocean, there is a British nuclear submarine carrying powerful ICBMs (nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles). In the control room of the sub, the Daily Mail reports, “there is a safe attached to a control room floor. Inside that, there is an inner safe. And inside that sits a letter. It is addressed to the submarine commander and it is from the Prime Minister. In that letter, Gordon Brown conveys the most awesome decision of his political career … and none of us is ever likely to know what he decided.” “

There are a few surprising revelations in the article:

“Suffice it to say that there is a complicated series of checks that the submarine commander must perform to establish the true situation—one of which, curiously, is to determine whether Radio 4 is still broadcasting”

Nice. So at some point, some radio operator is supposed to turn on a radio and, for the first time in their lives, be pleased that ‘The Archers’ is on.

The rest of the article contains an examination of the psychology and morality of Mutually Assured Destruction, and how its remnants live on in this post-Cold War era.

“HIS plan to declare independence from the UK and create his own state on a tiny island off Shetland may sound like the plot of a quaint Ealing comedy.

But Stuart Hill’s quest to turn the windswept crag of Forewick Holm into the autonomous Crown Dependency of Forvik has been dealt serious blows by two timeless adversaries: mother nature and the taxman.”

“His case rests on a deal struck in 1469 when King Charles of Denmark effectively pawned Shetland to Scotland’s King James III to raise money for his daughter’s dowry. According to Hill, as the loan was never repaid and no other legal agreement was signed, Shetland was never officially part of Scotland and therefore is not subject to UK jurisdiction.”

But such scraps alone do not a genuine high speed network make*. The crucial elements you need for a successful high-speed network are (a) >200 kph operation, preferably >250 kph, (b) dedicated or mostly dedicated tracks, (c) a decent range of routes, (d) ease of use, including good connections, and (e) everything being built to good specifications.

None of these conditions really exist in the UK. Anyone who has ever travelled on the West Coast Main Line will know why it’s known as the most congested long-distance passenger railway in the world. The line is used so much that it’s amazing that there aren’t more delays, frankly. Carriages are too small and always single-deck due to the restrictive loading gauge compared to the Continent, and often are too few per train, which makes overcrowding worse. Connections are improving but sometimes unpredictable, and ticketing is extremely confusing (Advance Apex Cheap-Day Return Non-Refundable with Young Person’s Railcard anyone?).

Every few years, UK governments announce that they’re going to embark on a Shinkansen or ICE style network, and it always gets shelved or watered down beyond all recognition. So it’s with interest that I note the noises coming from various parts of the political landscape that suggest that perhaps interests are beginning to converge. The Tories have been ostensibly backing the idea for a while, seeing it as a logical alternative to a third runway at Heathrow. But recently, Alex Salmond, First Minster of Scotland, also threw his weight behind a possible maglev network, and this week the (Labour) transport Minister Lord Adonis backed the creation of a radical new network in the most recent Prospect magazine:

“Equally significant for future policy are Japan’s evolving plans to pioneer the next generation of high-speed rail technology with a “maglev” line between Tokyo and Nagoya—to be open by 2025—cutting the existing “shinkansen” bullet train time for the 214 miles from one hour 40 minutes to less than an hour. What impressed me on a visit to Japan in November to study the “shinkansen” experience was not only the potentially revolutionary nature of the “maglev,” but that the justification for the new Tokyo-Nagoya line, to be entirely privately financed, depends on traffic saturation on the existing 45-year-old shinkansen line, and not a desire for even higher speed travel per se. Packed trains with up to 1,600 passengers leave every five minutes from 6am until 10pm on the existing line, which is close to capacity.”

Significantly, what seems to have re-ignited Adonis’ interest is the recent vote in California to authorise a bond issue to fund the construction of a TGV-style line between Sacramento and San Diego.

What’s this? A Labour minister impressed by a publicly-financed infrastructure project? Surely not! And really, isn’t it a little embarrassing that we should be taking our cues in rail infrastructure from the Americans – one of the most passenger-rail-phobic nations on earth?

Still, the intentions are good, and I hope he carries through on the ideas in his piece. The trouble is, Britain’s rail network is still mostly privatised, which (aside from being a Bad Idea anyway) would make delivery and co-ordination difficult. There’s little to no chance of a private company being able to invest the sums required given the current difficulties of obtaining credit – let alone having a decent chance of a return on the money. Public funding could be difficult too. As The Economist points out, although the Keynesian aspect of such a large public engineering project would be a welcome boost to consumption and employment in these difficult economic times, UK public finances are already in a pretty dire state.

So I wait with interest to see who puts forward a solid proposal, if anyone. I guess the Tories and SNP have more to make of it politically, but past schemes have vanished in ball of hyperbole before.

Anyway, I must go and catch a TGV to France. Or shall I take an ICE to Germany? Or a Pendolino to Italy? One is spoilt for choice in Zürich.**

* Quasi-German word order there. I apologise.

**Yes, I am a smug bastard.

–Update

A re-cap of some of the teething troubles (and outright accidents) which the West Coast Main Line has experienced over the past three weeks has been posted by BBC News.

And also, things don’t always go smoothly in Switzerland…

Clyde Arc (Glasgow) at night. Photo by kevinmcc on Flickr.

A rare example of journalism from the Scotsman, in the form of a feature on devolution, independence, the credit crunch and Scotland’s future. The author gauges the feelings of people living and working around the Skye Bridge, Forth Rail Bridge, Clyde Arc and Stirling Bridge. A reasonable national barometer, I suppose.

I’ve been to Estonia. I was married in Malta when Scotland played there. That’s my aim for Scotland – to win the World Cup.”

So which does she think will happen first – Scottish independence or football glory? “Independence,” she laughs. “Definitely.”

Full article

Government will spy on every call and e-mail – Times Online

Ministers are considering spending up to £12 billion on a database to monitor and store the internet browsing habits, e-mail and telephone records of everyone in Britain.

GCHQ, the government’s eavesdropping centre, has already been given up to £1 billion to finance the first stage of the project.

Hundreds of clandestine probes will be installed to monitor customers live on two of the country’s biggest internet and mobile phone providers – thought to be BT and Vodafone. BT has nearly 5m internet customers.

Second story link

Coverage at The Register

I’m hoping, really hoping, that this is some kind of GCHQ policy analyst’s proverbial wet dream and nothing more.

Surely, the UK government can’t be considering this.

On the other hand, they do have a somewhat worrying track record…

Mielke would be proud.

The University then informs the police that this communterrorist literature has been trafficked, and the police arrest the MA student (Rizwaan Sabir) and detain him for six days without charge, after which they release him after confirming that the document was ‘illegal’. Then, they arrest the PA friend (Hicham Yezza) on immigration charges, set a date for an immigration hearing, then drop the charges in favour of a summary process involving no hearing (he’s set to be deported to Algeria on 1st June).

Starters for 10:

• How was Nottingham made aware that the material had been downloaded? Network snooping? Informants?
• How has Nottingham shown its commitment to academic freedom?
• As the prevailing leader in the discourse of security theatre, is a document available on a US government public website likely to be so dangerous it shouldn’t be seen by academic researchers, of all people?
• Should the UK government be judging what is and is not dangerous material?
• Why no fair hearing for Yezza?
• Should I securely erase my copies of Sun Tzu’s The Art of War, von Clausewitz’ On War, my copies of Al-Qaeda ‘statements’ and other materials I collected for my Security Studies class?
• When will the book burnings commence, and will they be carbon-neutral?

Incidentally, the offending document was on the US Department of Justice’ website…

If you know more about this story, please leave a comment.

More: Free Hicham Yezza blog, The Guardian, International Herald Tribune

Update: Here’s the offending material itself.

Update 2: More coverage at The Independent, ThisIsNottingham.co.uk and The Canadian Press. Still nothing from BBC News.

A teenager is facing prosecution for using the word “cult” to describe the Church of Scientology.

The unnamed 15-year-old was served the summons by City of London police when he took part in a peaceful demonstration opposite the London headquarters of the controversial religion.

Officers confiscated a placard with the word “cult” on it from the youth, who is under 18, and a case file has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.

A date has not yet been set for him to appear in court.

The decision to issue the summons has angered human rights activists and support groups for the victims of cults.

The incident happened during a protest against the Church of Scientology on May 10. Demonstrators from the anti-Scientology group, Anonymous, who were outside the church’s £23m headquarters near St Paul’s cathedral, were banned by police from describing Scientology as a cult by police because it was “abusive and insulting”.

Full story