Turmoil as Coalition pulls back from Big Brother plan
THE ‘Big Brother’ plan to spy on all emails and visits to websites descended into chaos yesterday when Nick Clegg declared it would not be ‘rammed’ into law.
Only hours after Home Secretary Theresa May had made a staunch defence of the mass surveillance policy, the Deputy Prime Minister said it was a ‘draft’ which would be subject to lengthy debate.
Opponents seized on the word ‘draft’ as evidence that it would not be a fullyfledged Bill, and therefore constituted a humiliating Government climbdown. They said ministers had been briefing that the Queen’s Speech would include full legislation.
But, amid mounting disarray, No.10 last night said it had never actually specified whether it would be a proper Bill or a draft one.
The ‘snoopers’ charter’ row is the latest in a string of disasters to hit the Coalition after gaffes over the fuel strike and the Budget.
Labour leader Ed Miliband said: ‘ Once again we see a very sensitive issue being spectacularly mishandled by this Government.
‘It is unclear what they are proposing. It is unclear what it means for people. It is always going to lead to fears about general browsing of emails unless they are clear about their proposals, clear about what they would mean, clear about how they are changing the law.’
The plan to force internet service providers and phone companies to store communications data has sparked a row which threatens to split the Coalition.
Both Tory and Liberal Democrat backbenchers are opposed to the idea, which was first suggested by Labour in 2006.
Some Lib Dems have been threatening to revolt if the Government presses ahead with the £2billion scheme, which would allow GCHQ, the police and security services to see who a person is communicating with and when.
They would not have access to the content without a warrant.
In a robust defence of the snooping powers, Mrs May said they would help to bring ‘criminals, paedophiles and terrorists’ to justice. But Lib Dem leader Mr Clegg, under mounting pressure from his own backbenchers, indicated there was nothing certain about the policy, and that existing powers to
‘Overkill and
intrusive’
check the details of emails and some website visits could be adequate.
He said: ‘ People should be reassured that we will not ram something through Parliament. We will consult and think whether existing powers are sufficient as they are. Anything in this area is highly sensitive. It’s a good thing we’re having a lively debate. They will be published in draft form so they can be subject to proper scrutiny and examination, and stress-tested.’
He promised a string of ‘safeguards’ to protect the public.
David Cameron was also forced to try to explain the confusion. The Prime Minister said: ‘ This is not about extending the reach of the state into people’s data, it’s about trying to keep up with modern technology.’
However senior figures continued to attack the ‘snoopers’ charter’.
Ex-chief constable Chris Fox, who was head of the Association of Chief Police Officers at the time of the 7/7 attacks, called the move ‘a massive intervention by the state into private lives’.
He said: ‘If you are investigating crime you have targets. It seems to be overkill and intrusive for the 99.9 per cent of the rest of us.’
Mr Fox said the idea was ‘fraught with danger for the innocent vast majority’, not least the risk of mistaken identification which could result from criminals disguising their communications as those of law-abiding citizens.
Meanwhile, papers leaked to campaign group Privacy International revealed that Lib Dem party managers have written to MPS telling them how to defend the plans.