UK Government Responds to a Petition to Repeal the Recently Introduced "Investigatory Powers Act"

[WelshDdraig]

Source: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/173199?reveal_response=yes

 

 

So, within days of the Investigatory Powers Act being introduced, the public was not happy about it.

The UK has a feature similar to the US, where if an official petition reaches a certain target, it will have to be given a formal response.

 

Well, such a petition was formed and has gathered over 144,000 signatures - and is still growing.

Way more that what is needed for an official response - Which was given today.

 

Spoiler

The Investigatory Powers Act dramatically increases transparency around the use of investigatory powers. It protects both privacy and security and underwent unprecedented scrutiny before becoming law.

 

The Government is clear that, at a time of heightened security threat, it is essential our law enforcement, security and intelligence services have the powers they need to keep people safe.

The Investigatory Powers Act transforms the law relating to the use and oversight of Investigatory powers. It strengthens safeguards and introduces world-leading oversight arrangements.

The Act does three key things. First, it brings together powers already available to law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies to obtain communications and data about communications. It makes these powers – and the safeguards that apply to them – clear and understandable.

 

Second, it radically overhauls the way these powers are authorised and overseen. It introduces a ‘double-lock’ for the most intrusive powers, including interception and all of the bulk capabilities, so warrants require the approval of a Judicial Commissioner. And it creates a powerful new Investigatory Powers Commissioner to oversee how these powers are used.

Third, it ensures powers are fit for the digital age. The Act makes a single new provision for the retention of internet connection records in order for law enforcement to identify the communications service to which a device has connected. This will restore capabilities that have been lost as a result of changes in the way people communicate.

 

 

Public scrutiny:

The Bill was subject to unprecedented scrutiny prior to and during its passage. 
The Bill responded to three independent reports: by David Anderson QC, the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation; by the Royal United Services Institute’s Independent Surveillance Review Panel; and by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament. All three of those authoritative independent reports agreed a new law was needed. 

 

The Government responded to the recommendations of those reports in the form of a draft Bill, published in November 2015. That draft Bill was submitted for pre-legislative scrutiny by a Joint Committee of both Houses of Parliament. The Intelligence and Security Committee and the House of Commons Science and Technology Committee conducted parallel scrutiny. Between them, those Committees received over 1,500 pages of written submissions and heard oral evidence from the Government, industry, civil liberties groups and many others. The recommendations made by those Committees informed changes to the Bill and the publication of further supporting material.

 

A revised Bill was introduced in the House of Commons on 1 March, and completed its passage on 16 November, meeting the timetable for legislation set by Parliament during the passage of the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014. Over 1,700 amendments to the Bill were tabled and debated during this time.

 

The Government has adopted an open and consultative approach throughout the passage of this legislation, tabling or accepting a significant number of amendments in both Houses of Parliament in order to improve transparency and strengthen privacy protections. These included enhanced protections for trade unions and journalistic and legally privileged material, and the introduction of a threshold to ensure internet connection records cannot be used to investigate minor crimes.

 

 

Privacy and Oversight:

The Government has placed privacy at the heart of the Investigatory Powers Act. The Act makes clear the extent to which investigatory powers may be used and the strict safeguards that apply in order to maintain privacy.

A new overarching ‘privacy clause’ was added to make absolutely clear that the protection of privacy is at the heart of this legislation. This privacy clause ensures that in each and every case a public authority must consider whether less intrusive means could be used, and must have regard to human rights and the particular sensitivity of certain information. The powers can only be exercised when it is necessary and proportionate to do so, and the Act includes tough sanctions – including the creation of new criminal offences – for those misusing the powers. 

The safeguards in this Act reflect the UK’s international reputation for protecting human rights. The unprecedented transparency and the new safeguards – including the ‘double lock’ for the most sensitive powers – set an international benchmark for how the law can protect both privacy and security. 

Home Office

Essentially, the Government is sticking to their guns, as it were - and are claiming that this law is needed for security issues and does not violate privacy and adheres to the UK's commitment that this act does not violate human rights - even though this Act is so draconian that it is even being compared to that of China and Russia.

 

Personally, I am against this act. I want my privacy and i don't want the government searching me because I look at weapons online for research

(I play AirSoft, so some of the search terms I use - could possibly get attention, which I don't want) - and that's just one example.

 

The fact the Public didn't really get a say on the matter for this is stupid. While it has changed since its draft bill that was produced last year - I don't want the government to have access to everything I do.

 

And before anyone uses the statement - "Got nothing to hide, got nothing to panic about", you are part of the problem. 

Privacy is essential to everyone's life, and is a right, not a privilege that other people can interfere with. 

 

Your Thoughts? Please leave them down below.

 

[Naeaes]

So... That's it then? It's official and permanent and in effect now?

 

I gotta agree with you. The "i have nothing to hide" argument is such huge pile of BS. Privacy is one of the core human needs. We've been wearing clothes and living in houses with walls for tens of thousands of years. The requirement for a basic level of privacy is not a modern phenomenon. (edit: So yes, This absolutely is a human-rights issue)

 

Do you know how are they planning on implementing this? Is VPN or TOR going to help?

 

 

 

 

[WelshDdraig]

4 minutes ago, Naeaes said:

Do you know how are they planning on implementing this? Is VPN or TOR going to help?

Its going to be at the ISP level. So Changing IP's using a VPN might help, but I'm not too sure, as its still going through the ISP in the UK. I assume they are going by the logic, an IP = an address - which is not how it works...

 

Going back to "going through the ISP", while the IP is masked (if using a VPN), the data is not - and since it has to go through the ISP, what is to stop them "snooping" at all the inbound/outbound traffic - not just British?

[Matt_98]

11 minutes ago, Naeaes said:

So... That's it then? It's official and permanent and in effect now?

 

I gotta agree with you. The "i have nothing to hide" argument is such huge pile of BS. Privacy is one of the core human needs. We've been wearing clothes and living in houses with walls for tens of thousands of years. The requirement for a basic level of privacy is not a modern phenomenon. (edit: So yes, This absolutely is a human-rights issue)

 

Do you know how are they planning on implementing this? Is VPN or TOR going to help?

 

 

 

 

 

A vpn will help somewhat but the law has some sneaky parts that allow them to make companies add backdoors so they will soon be able to unencrypt your network pakets

[Ebajgora98]

Depends, if your VPN encrypts the data before it leaves your PC and then decrypts it once it reaches the vpn's servers so they can forward your request, it should stay hidden from the ISP. I think Tunnelbear does this but I could be mistaken.

[GrayFox1991]

This has always been bad, but recently my larger concern has always been who they are giving this access to. If you take a look below, you can see that they are not exactly being restrictive over who has access. At this point it may as well be public domain. The bill was passed under the premise that access would only be given if it was a national security concern (counter terrorism act all over again).

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/investigatory-powers-bill-act-snoopers-charter-browsing-history-what-does-it-mean-a7436251.html

To the UK government (my government), FUCK YOU.

[Duskie]

I think we all know where this is going.

 

Spoiler

 

[treeroy]

It's ridiculous what the politicians get away with. They have far too much control over the country.

 

I also am concerned about what they might do once we leave the EU - if that means less shared work with European powers, then they may increase their power even more here in an effort to keep up.

The worst part though is that everyone just accepts it. If this were about any privacy issue that wasn't online, (e.g. if they installed cameras in your house) this would be an outrage and people would revolt.

[Misanthrope]

I'd be funny if the response was just a massive dox of everyone who signed the petition incluying criminal records, political affiliations, etc. Like "Listen you cunts we've been doing this for years, we just can do it openly now!"

[Void Reaper]

15 minutes ago, treeroy said:

The worst part though is that everyone just accepts it. If this were about any privacy issue that wasn't online, (e.g. if they installed cameras in your house) this would be an outrage and people would revolt.

That's so true, sadly. Somehow most people still have that mindset of "Oh, worst case is they see what kinds of Games i play and might watch me doing so" as if it's something to joke about. They don't seem to see the big problem behind it, like reading through your personal Emails etc.

[Murdoch]

It shouldn't just be the UK that's pissed off with this.

 

This law legalises bulk hacking on foreign soil too. Presumably not against our allies in the 5 (or is it 14 now?) eyes program. But any other country could be hacked by the UK en masse. Shocking piece of legislation, on behalf of the UK I apologise for the actions of our government.

 

Annoyingly, most of the UK public are too apathetic to care.

[jagdtigger]

10 hours ago, Matt_98 said:

A vpn will help somewhat but the law has some sneaky parts that allow them to make companies add backdoors so they will soon be able to unencrypt your network pakets

Just rent a server in a foreign country and use OpenVPN with 4096 bit RSA keys + TLS auth. Good luck for the government breaking this in their life-time...

[Trik'Stari]

11 hours ago, Misanthrope said:

I'd be funny if the response was just a massive dox of everyone who signed the petition incluying criminal records, political affiliations, etc. Like "Listen you cunts we've been doing this for years, we just can do it openly now!"

Indeed.

 

I really hope this goes nowhere at all. I hope tens of millions of people sign it, and the government responds with "what the fuck are you gonna do about it?".

 

So that maybe, just maybe, the people of the UK will wake the hell up and realize what a police state they've created and why that's a horrible thing.

 

Some people just have to learn the lessons of history the hard way.