Slashdot Mirror
19,000 Emails Against and 0 In Favor of UK Draft Communications Bill
Qedward writes "Open source writer Glyn Moody discusses the Draft Communications Bill (aka Snooper's Charter) in the UK and how the Joint Parliamentary Committee that had been considering the bill received almost 19,000 emails during its consultation period. He notes: 'Out of 19,000 emails received by the Committee on the subject of the proposed Draft Communications Bill, not a single one was in favor of it, or even agreed with its premise. Has there ever been a bill so universally rejected by the public in a consultation? Clearly, it must be thrown out completely.'"
People always voice their concern when they're against something but rarely express their opinion if they're for it. This makes it unfair comparison. Just saying..
I wrote to my MP, via a link the Open Rights Group (which I'm a member of) sent. I was pleased with the reply -- my MP agreed with me, gave some additional points that I'd not made, and asked me to forward any reply I received to him.
(At least, I think I did. There have been a few similar bills, and I've not necessarily kept up with which one is which.)
While I am sure it is universally hated, taking the fact there was 19,000 against and 0 for as proof of that is just idiotic. People generally only respond to these requests for public comment when it is something they are against. The conclusion based on this is as dumb as the bill itself
When faced by overwhelming public rejection of a Bill has there ever been a modern government that has thrown one out because of that? Clearly they will just change the name and sneak it in with something else. Because what do the public know?
Government politics is now so completely flawed that it needs to be replaced. I'm with Billy Connolly when he said that "the desire to be an MP [modify as appropriate for your jurisdiction] should automatically prevent you from becoming one."
...suggest such a thing. Just like it's illegal to organize and conspire to murder or terrorize people. Oh wait. That means it already is.
What a sylly name. How is that even pronounced?
It's Welsh. An Anglicised form would probably be "Glin", rhyming with "tin".
Government doesn't pass or reject bills based on what its subjects want. Government passes or rejects bills based on what it wants.
I mean not to sound negative, but does anybody think that e-mails or petitions really matter in a sense that because you think you have a voice, that your opinion will matter to politicians? It's different in the UK I guess to a larger extent because you have more redress to vote the bums out of office if they aren't doing their job. In the US, we get petitions like the this and then the government choose to ignore it. I'm not being naive here and yes, social media is playing a bigger part in the attention span of everybody, but do we think we can change the world with twitter? Do we think that the politicians that represent us will really sit up and take notice?
As Stalin said "The people who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything."
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
If it is a new account, then the first post they make on that new account WILL ALWAYS be on "only this story" where "this story" is the first one they post to.
When you are directly quoting someone's writing it is usually considered a professional courtesy not to change the spelling to suit your own preferences.
He did not say "not a single one was in favor of it", he said "not a single one was in favour of it.
What a sylly name. How is that even pronounced?
It's Welsh. An Anglicised form would probably be "Glin", rhyming with "tin".
And if anyone wants to try actually saying it with the broad "l" that features in Celtic languages, aim for "Glin" but when sounding the "l" don't touch the back of your front top teeth with the tip of your tongue but instead curl the tongue over your front top teeth and just touch the front of them with the tongue tip. It makes the "l" sound subtly different.
And if you can master that then seek out other Celtic words containing "l" and impress yourself with how better they sound with a broad "l".
Latha math (Good day)
I'm guessing that the only people who would support it are unable to open an email client.
In a wide-reaching formal study, it was discovered that fully 100% (9,345,124 out of 9,345,124) babies cried when receiving vaccination shots. Not one spoke up to express positive support for them, despite being told of their long term efficacy at promoting individual and societal health. Therefore, infant vaccinations are bad policy and should be banned, according to the Jenny McCarthy and Slashdot Submitter school of public policy reasoning.
I'm not saying it's a good bill. I am saying that These emails mean dick and squat other than "special interests, even potentially legitimate ones, are good at making their voices heard."
Clearly, the submitter doesn't understand the purpose of a consulation in the UK if he thinks this will get the bill thrown out.
The purpose of a public consultation is so that Westminster can tick a box saying "we had a public consultation". If the consultation is favourable, they additionally may say that a bill has public support. If a consultation is negative, the consultation is simply ignored. I've responded to a couple of these consultations and I shan't bother again because they were simply ignored despite volumes of correspondence voicing (often constructive) opposition.
Perhaps a consultation won't be ignored if the majority of the comments are from marginal constituencies, but 19,000 voters can safely be totally ignored if not.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Being the proud posessor of a Welsh name - come on, it's not that hard!
You must have heard of Bob Dylan (who took his name from Dylan Thomas, the Welsh poet). The y in Glyn is exactly as the y in Dylan. (Although many people from the US seem to think that Dylan is actually pronounced Dialin', which is what you do on a telephone - despite Bob Dylan's fame).
I know a motorcycle sidecar racer called Glyn Jones who crashes often (and puts his passengers in hospital so frequently) his nickname is the Glyn Reaper. Think how you pronounce 'grim', it rhymes with Glyn, hence the joke.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Use a procedural gimmick to get it across and tell everyone on BBC1 that, "They have to pass it first to understand why they needed it later. And, you're just not listening to him. This will save the economy. But you can't actually measure the success, so if it doesn't look like it's succeeding, just wait 3 years and manipulate numbers to make it appear something somewhere is working!"
As I already commented, consultations generally are to tick a box "we had a consultation" (not to pay any actual attention to the responses), furthermore the document from "JOINT COMMITTEE ON DRAFT COMMUNICATIONS DATA BILL" is already titled "WRITTEN EVIDENCE: SUMMARY OF CHAIN EMAILS" (sorry about caps, copy and pasting from the PDF). They note more than once that most of the emails are pro-forma and go onto mention it's from a political pressure group website. This means furthermore that the responses will be ignored.
If you're ever responding to a European Union consultaiton, they say right up front that pro-forma responses will be ignored (at least they are honest) - so if you ever want the slightest chance that your response to an EU consultation then you have to write your concerns in your own words. I suspect Westminster is the same, they just don't come right out and say it.
Therefore I'm even more pessimistic that anyone is going to pay the slightest bit of attention to this consultation - it will be full steam ahead for this awful bill.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
The OP adding in "posting in this and only this story" is redundant with the statement that this "is a newly created account". It's rather like saying "this round ball has a curved surface. Just saying."
That's them registering pain when they have a needle stuck in their arm.
How many babies were in favour of dying from measels, mumps or rubella?
Clearly if no one is in favor of the bill then it needs to pass! (Government thinking)
She may have found someone from the other side and agree to be 'paired' with them. Then neither of them vote on the bill.
I'd rather be riding my '63 Triumph T120.
i got his email just now:
The All-Party IP Group would like to invite you to the launch of their latest report, to be held at 4.30pm on Monday 29th October in Room W1 at the Houses of Parliament.
Hosted by John Whittingdale MP, Chair of the All Party IP Group, the launch will be an opportunity to discuss The Role of Government in Promoting and Protecting Intellectual Property, which examines the effectiveness of current Government structures and policies in delivering an environment where individuals and businesses are able to generate economic returns for their creations, innovations and investment. It will also provide an opportunity to discuss what measures the Government needs to put in place in order to maximise growth and innovation in the creative, design and branded goods sectors.
Perhaps the ones in favour were intercepted and censored in the spirit of the bill. ;-)
The root of this surveillance shit comes from Tony Blair. In 2005 he used the UK presidency of the EU to push through the Data Retention Directive. This was the directive that established the "everyone might be a terrorist, so we should watch everyone just in case they do something in the future that justifies the surveillance we're doing now".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive
The thinking is circular there, they justify watching YOU by quoting how it was used successfully against SOME OTHER BLOKE, as if you are them. Or more truthfully, the assumption that YOU WILL BECOME THEM, and thus your privacy right can be eliminated now to catch you later.
Jacqui Smith MP for Vulnerable People, then expanded that into a mass surveillance directive with databases recording everything you do, indexed ready for searching.... "TO PROTECT THE MOST VULNERABLE PEOPLE [from you]". It became too much of a vote loser and was killed, she lost her seat and is currently trying to worm her way into the BBC Board [God NO!]
Along comes Theresa May and the Conservatives with the voters wanting an end to this shit. They start out well, trying to reform the Criminal Background Check system (under which Police can make secret unchallengeable malicious claims against anyone to prevent their employment, and it is a crime to tell anyone).
Not surprisingly the police don't like this, and start campaigning against the Torys with "pedos will kill your children" stories.
http://www.communitycare.co.uk/Articles/11/02/2011/116266/nick-clegg-defends-changes-to-crb-checks.htm
"Government plans to scale back criminal record checks could let "thousands" of dangerous individuals [you, it's your CRB check] come into contact with children [think of the children] and vulnerable adults [think of the child like adults! We want to use these powers even when no children are involved!], an expert [police PR man] has warned. "
Not good, and when it comes to killing the surveillance bill, the Tories bottle and Theresa May tries to give the police some of what they want to appease them. She's also aware that Clean IT has been mostly agreed, under which she will be required to filter and force ISPs to monitor the internet... to protect from terrorists and people who might disseminate terrorist info [i.e. to protect you from you because your so weak and easily influenced and they are so wise].
http://www.edri.org/cleanIT
"This document is not for publication, the recipient may share this document only on a need-to-know basis". [f*ck you But Klaasen, how can you have a discussion document that is secret? It's outside the democratic legal basis! Your document makes it clear than many of the things that would be illegal under the privacy directive have been agreed and things like changing the privacy directive to fit, are items to be discussed in secret.]
Of course the ever present US copyright lobby wants this too.
http://falkvinge.net/2011/09/05/cable-reveals-extent-of-lapdoggery-from-swedish-govt-on-copyright-monopoly/
"In short: every law proposal, every ordinance, and every governmental report hostile to the net, youth, and civil liberties here in Sweden in recent years have been commissioned by the US government and industry interests."
So at this point, you have a cowardly Tory govt, and an EU leadership that have no connection to ordinary people. A bunch of directives and national laws being pushed through by foreign powers, with the complicity of the national police forces and opposition MPs.
That's basically the sum of the situation. /rant
This bill is pretty bad, but that doesnt stop me from thinking how unlikely it is that not one single person in 19000 replied in favor. These figures must be wrong.
Then it would be spelled 'Gllyn'. ... interesting.
Machynlleth has been in the news a lot lately. The range of pronunciations by various newsreader is
While we're at it: 'Grinnitch' not 'Grennitch', 'Shroozbry' not 'Shrowzbry' etc., etc..
"Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
I'm saying that the first post posted by an account CAN ONLY BE ON ONE topic.
Unless you have a quantum slashdot, your first post from an account can be only one first post on one topic. Posts don't bifurcate and end up on several threads. They are unitary. Singular. One.
Piemasters has 1 comment, this one, which is a first post.
http://slashdot.org/~PieMasters/comments
You're depending on a notion that your government really gives a shit about what you think. Most of their minds were already made up and that won't change. Enjoy.
Simple solution: you hold a lottery among all people of voting age. The losers go serve in the legislature. Lots of good points:
1) Fair
2) Representatives don't owe anyone payback for helping them into office
3) Representatives are truly representative of society (i.e., no lawyer bias, or rich person's bias), and you might even see some homeless people in the legislature for a change
4) When you make the changeover, enforce that any benefits they vote the Legislature membership don't go to them, but to the next "winners"
5) Force service by "well, you either serve in the Legislature, or you serve in prison. Your choice!"
downside:
a) could give the bureaucracy too much power--inexperienced legislatures
b) people stuck with the job could do a lousy job 'cause they don't really care and resent the duty
--PM
Don't ask for consultation and you won't get rejection. The US politicians try to do this all the time and sometime it slips by in fine print along with other bills.
(It's worth pointing out that just because an owner takes a dog to the vets to be neutered, it doesn't mean that politicians can remove the testicles of the electorate).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_sterilization
The United States was the first country to concertedly undertake compulsory sterilization programs for the purpose of eugenics.[31] The heads of the program were avid believers in eugenics and frequently argued for their program. It was shut down due to ethical problems. The principal targets of the American program were the mentally retarded and the mentally ill, but also targeted under many state laws were the deaf, the blind, people with epilepsy, and the physically deformed. According to the activist Angela Davis, Native Americans, as well as African-American women[32] were sterilized against their will in many states, often without their knowledge while they were in a hospital for other reasons (e.g. childbirth).
Everything was better in the good ol' times, when we didn't have fascists/socialists like Bush/Obama leading this country to ruin and stomping on our liberties.
You must have heard of Bob Dylan (who took his name from Dylan Thomas, the Welsh poet). The y in Glyn is exactly as the y in Dylan. (Although many people from the US seem to think that Dylan is actually pronounced Dialin', which is what you do on a telephone
The typical pronounciation of the man's name in the USA is more like "Dillun". I suspect you were talking to someone using one of our outlier accents (at a guess, I'd say a thick Southern American English, but that's just a SWAG).
About 3 years ago, our government held a nationwide public consultation on copyright reform. The response was tremendous (greater response than any other similar consultation in our country's history, in fact), and with only a handful of exceptions, there was a very pronounced unifying voice among the responses, which was to *NOT* offer legal protections to digital locks in a similar manner to the US's DMCA.
But...meet Bill C-32 (for those of you unfamiliar with it, it's a lot like the DMCA, but doesn't have exceptions for things like fair dealing or personal use, both of which are explicitly listed in the bill as not being applicable when digital locks are present), which finally passed just this year. After being tabled and retabled, the conservatives finally managed to push it through on account of the majority government they were finally able to acquire after the last election, and the fact that enough of their electorate are ignorant enough about the implications of the law that there probably won't ever be any consequences for ignoring what people said that they wanted.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
[QUOTE]Has there ever been a bill so universally rejected by the public in a consultation?[/QUOTE] ObamaCare
This is why politicians should be paid minimum wage. The only thing keeping them in that position will be the position itself, and not the money. They already agreed that's enough money to live off of anyway.
Had this act already passed, there'd be no need to send emails. They'd ready know the views of John Taylor of Poole, along with tens of millions more people.
-- Using the preview button since 2005
"Out of 19,000 emails received by the Committee on the subject of the proposed Draft Communications Bill, not a single one was in favor of it, or even agreed with its premise. Has there ever been a bill so universally rejected by the public in a consultation?"
In other words, the people overwhelmingly support this initiative and it should be implemented as soon as possible, probably way pay raises for the politicians involved?
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day, but teach a man to phish...
Reminds me of when Google introduced its new version of News a couple-three years back. There were thousands of messages on its user forum deploring the new interface, and asking for the old one back. I never saw a single message in favor of the new version. (Ok, there was one, but it was tongue-in-cheek.)
FWIW, Google never did go back to the old version, despite its unanimous rejection on the part of users.