Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UK Snooper's Charter, AKA The Investigatory Powers Bill, Passes Through Commons (betanews.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the watching-your-every-move dept.

Mark Wilson quotes a report from BetaNews: The controversial Snooper's Charter -- or the Investigatory Powers Bill as it is officially known -- has been passed through the House of Commons by UK MPs. An overwhelming majority of politicians (444 to 69) voted in favor of the bill which has been roundly criticized by both the public and technology companies. The Investigatory Powers Bill grants the UK government, security, and intelligence agencies greater powers for monitoring internet usage, as well as permitting bulk data collection and remote hacking of smartphones. The law allows for the kind of mass surveillance that Edward Snowden warned about, and while the bill may have passed a majority vote, there are still those who fear not enough has been done to safeguard individuals' privacy. UPDATE 6/7/16: The title/body has been updated to clarify that the bill has been passed through the House of Commons. It will have to pass through the House of Lords before it becomes law. As one Anonymous Coward pointed out, the House of Lords may send it back for modification or reject it entirely.

10 of 88 comments (clear)

  1. So long, UK. by Yvan256 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Even the Doctor can't save you now.

    1. Re:So long, UK. by Gravis+Zero · · Score: 3, Informative

      Even the Doctor can't save you now.

      The Doctor protects Earth from external threats. He's quite happy to let us tear ourselves apart. However, being fictional has him at a considerable disadvantage, which only a stand alone complex could hope to resolve.

      --
      Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
  2. Inaccurate: it's not law yet by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Incorrect. It has been approved by the House of Commons vote. But it is not law, yet.

    It has to pass the House of Lords, and they may send it back for modification or reject it entirely. If they reject it three times, it is finished. This has happened, and there are many signs the Lords do not approve.

    1. Re:Inaccurate: it's not law yet by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2

      Under the Parliaments Act 1911 and 1949, the House of Commons can vote to over rule the House of Lords and pass a bill into law without the agreement of the Lords.

      Labour did this to enact the Hunting Act 2004, which banned fox hunting, so its still fully available to current governments.

  3. House of Lords could reject it by duguk · · Score: 4, Informative

    This isn't law yet.
    It has been passed, but it can still be pushed back by the House of Lords.

    The Register has a more informative, but shorter article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2...

  4. If you keep voting for the same people... by FlyHelicopters · · Score: 3, Insightful

    An overwhelming majority of politicians (444 to 69) voted in favor of the bill which has been roundly criticized by both the public and technology companies.

    Yet those same people keep voting the same idiots into office...

    You only have yourselves to blame... we have the same problem in the US.

  5. Re:A little late but.... by mrchaotica · · Score: 2

    There's a reason the setting of the book was "Airstrip One..."

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

  6. They seem to be forgetting something . . . by mmell · · Score: 2
    Remember, remember!

    The fifth of November,

    The Gunpowder treason and plot;

    I know of no reason

    Why the Gunpowder treason

    Should ever be forgot! . . .

  7. I'm shocked by Dunbal · · Score: 2

    Look at that, a government grants itself even more tyrannical powers. See it wouldn't be so bad if the government could be trusted to use these powers only against "terrorists", but what they really want to use it for is to make an example of Mr. Smith because he's 200 pounds short on his tax return, Mr. Green because he posted something naughty about immigration, and Mr Blue because he happens to like midget porn and some bureaucrat didn't check and thought it was kiddie porn.

    --
    Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
  8. Re:Um.. I don't know much about UK politics by Richard_at_work · · Score: 2

    The intention of the House of Lords is to have a voting body which is not beholden to an electorate, so they can make the unpopular decisions and not be punished for it.

    This is the same House of Lords which rejected 90 day detention of terrorism suspects without charge, which was something the government was desperately trying to push through a few years ago.