nav search
Data Center Software Security Transformation DevOps Business Personal Tech Science Emergent Tech Bootnotes BOFH

back to article
Labour will create FUD and then abstain on UK Snoopers' Charter vote

Abstain?

I'm sorry, Labour, but if you think "the government should get it right", then you have to vote against the bill, so that they will have to go back and start over (for the third time). Abstaining, as in having no opinion, or being indifferent, is just shockingly sad. I expect MPs to have an opinion on such important matters, and take a clear position.

58
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Abstain?

That will be the end of the career for a couple of new Labour elects which replaced Liberals - Cambridge, Oxford East and other university/high tech towns stand a chance of exactly zero of being re-elected if voting for the Snoopers Charter.

10
0
Unhappy

Re: Abstain?

Abstaining is more than sad. Too cowardly to stand up and say NO, and too cowardly to share the blame if this goes through.

On Bills of such importance, planned abstention is an abdication of their responsibility to the electorate.

29
0

Re: Abstain?

Basically they agree with it but think it sufficiently unpopular that they don't want their name on it. Next time they get it they'll use it with glee and blame the Cons any time there is bad press.

Weasels.

26
0
Silver badge
Flame

Re: Abstain?

Maybe it is just a sneaky way for the Tory wing of the Labour Party to launch a torpedo at the rest of the party, since abstaining isn't going to impress either the supporters of the bill or its opponents. At least if you vote one way or the other then you only piss off half the people...

If you want to take control of the party then you could do far worse than forcing a leadership election by making the party as unpopular as possible.

0
3

Re: Abstain?

"That will be the end of the career for a couple of new Labour elects which replaced Liberals - Cambridge, Oxford East and other university/high tech towns stand a chance of exactly zero of being re-elected if voting for the Snoopers Charter."

worse things could befall the nation ....

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Abstain?

"weasels".

Last time I checked, weasels aren't shameless and or two-faced cowards, they're just, weaselly.

8
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Abstain?

That is so stoatly true.

7
0

Re: Abstain?

Its not Weasel, its Weisel :-)

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Abstain?

Andy Burnham has a proud tradition of sitting on his hands when it comes to these sorts of votes. Last year he abstained on the Welfare Bill after saying it was a bad piece of legislation, and then when it was on the books, went around saying Labour should have opposed it.

In this case, he's even on record as supporting the aims of the bill and doesn't want to cause a delay to get it on to the statute book. Burnham has no problem with warrantless mass surveillance, he opposes proper judicial oversight and he's too technologically ignorant to realise that increasing the size of the haystack doesn't make it easier to find needles.

So let's not forget, the likes of Burnham would be putting just this sort of legislation in front of Parliament if they'd gained a majority. Our former minister for ID cards is the perfect little authoritarian apparatchik that does so well in the Home Office.

Crap - we actually did need the LibDems...

13
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Abstain?

Crap - we actually did need the LibDems...

Unfortunately we fell for Cameron's Trump-style blame shifting and blamed the good guys for what his lot were up to.

15
0

Re: Abstain?

I WAS the UK's LibDem voter. I feel vindicated now.

10
0
Bronze badge
Facepalm

Re: Abstain?

No, there were two of us.

5
0
Silver badge

Re: Abstain?

Gotno, What have weasels done to you that you think so badly of them?

2
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: Abstain?

Dear Britain,

We're publicly against this, but we'd really like to have these powers the next time we're in government, so we're going to vote "present".

As always, just happy to be here, and with much love

Labour

5
0
Holmes

It's so blatantly obvious that the current government and its opposition want the Snoopers' Charter to succeed. Yes, a dose of FUD is likely but it is more likely that Labour will do nothing to stop the bill because it is in favour of it.

Consider the American model. Both sides were "horrified" to find that the NSA were snooping and slurping but neither has made any realistic attempt to stop it. To this day they are more interested in catching Snowdon and prosecuting him for "treason" or whatever than tightening up on data privacy.

That's the politician's mindset. The UK is no different in that respect, despite the surface noise MPs make about privacy. It's all "do as I say, not as I do" with them - the whole expenses row should have taught people that much if nothing else.

33
0

Remember also that Andy Burnham supported ID cards whilst at the Home Office. He supported greater controls over internet content whilst at the DCMS. More recently he floated the idea of screwing us all over and sacrificing our privacy for his short term gain if the government would only release files held over the Shrewsbury 24.

He's not to be trusted. Under any circumstances.

Nicking a Red Dwarf quote for a moment IMO Burnham is a cheating, weasley, low-life scumbucket with all the charm and social grace of a pubic louse.

26
0
Silver badge

Bit hard on pubic lice isn't it? They're just trying to make a living - not trying to reclaim £19.99 for an IKEA bathrobe:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5293553/MPs-expenses-Andy-Burnhams-battle-over-claim.html

9
0

All political flavours want more, and more, control and access to citizen datacomms.

The threat to them, and their owners, comes not from "terrorists" but from their own people: When they finally raise their heads from Eastenders/Corrie/NCIS/ETC and realise they have been rogered royally for decades, by their "servants" in the politically/morally/criminally corrupt political parties.

I doubt their come-uppance will come in my lifetime. Shame, I would really have liked a walk around Westmonster to see them all dangling from lamposts, by their necks.

12
2
Anonymous Coward

I tried emailing my MP and got some shoddy stock reply that him and other Labour MP's are sending word for word.

One question I wanted answering was what about future governments? These powers allow the government to govern itself in regards to mass surveillance of it's citizens. What if some far right or religious party gets into power? Can you imagine what they would do with these powers?

These MP's will sit on the fence though when it all goes to shit I hope they realise what they have done.

15
0
Unhappy

It's very sad and I clearly haven't been giving my own MP, Michelle Thomson, enough credit up till now because she gave a great response and said that she'd definitely vote against it, short of significant information to alleviate her concerns. She's independent now but she added that the SNP would be challenging the bill on a number of aspects so hopefully they won't end up sitting on the fence like Labour.

6
0

The SNP abstained too unfortunately.

As for the lib dems they opposed it. All eight of them. It's just a pity that they neither matter any more nor bothered to oppose the likes of DRIPA when they had any real power.

1
0

Just for the record, Michelle Thomson did vote against it. Only one of 15 who did. I will thank her very much.

0
0
Silver badge
Gimp

Abstention DOESN'T work!

Not voting is NOT voting NO!

These gimps are all as bad as each other. Pic of typical MP off-duty ---->

10
0

Re: Abstention DOESN'T work!

Not voting is NOT voting NO!

It isn't, no. But it is a way of dodging the issue.

As I said before, the heart of the matter is that Labour actually support the idea (consider that not all snooping law was Tory built) but aren't up to the task of taking the fallout from public criticism.

They are trying to have their cake and eat it too since they can count on the Tories, naturally, to vote for the bill without too much meaningful opposition but can later insist that they didn't support the bill should something go wrong.

In other words, they are not providing a meaningful opposition. MPs and other politicians get riled up when ordinary citizens withhold their votes because they can't trust any standing candidate yet wonder why the public then view actions like this one with disdain. Like I said; "do as I say, not as I do."

0
0
Silver badge

Opposition?

The job of the opposition is to oppose. Abstinence should not be an option at that level in our democratic system - only by voting against a proposal can it be sent back for revision and resubmitted, by abstaining the opposition is effectively declaring it has no opinion. Disgusting.

10
0
Silver badge

Re: Opposition?

1) Labour are in favour of warrentless snooping (just look at what they did while in power!)

2) Labour hold enough votes to block this if they voted against this along with all of the other MP's against it.

Therefore, it appears obvious that they are abstaining because they want it to go through, but also want to be able to protest that "we didn't vote for this" in the future, because nothing in the universe has a half life shorter than a politicians memory for inconvenient facts.

9
0

Parliament should be abolished and MP's hung as a warning and each region governed by it's own assembly, that is directly accountable to the public it represents, with one member voted to national assembly and can only be a representative for 3 years . If they screw up, they get banned from public office and not rewarded with pay rises, dodgy expenses and gongs like our current free-loading !

5
0
Silver badge

Careful

That sounds like "terrorist" talk!

1
0

You just have to wonder how MP's would vote if they were not specifically exempted from this legislation..

1
0
Facepalm

They *think* they're exempted - see the Wilson Doctrine for details...

4
0
Anonymous Coward

I though the wilson doctrine was being put into law with this act.

If MP's are exempt from the IPB won't that exclude the very people this bill is trying to catch? Oh the irony.

4
0
Big Brother

Labour...

... the people who wanted to introduce ID Cards, ANPR cameras at every junction so they could track our journeys and issue automatic speeding tickets if you got from A to B too fast, who wanted to monitor the development of every child *just in case* they might turn out to be a potential juvenile delinquent...

17
0

I read the guidelines

I couldn't see anything in the long boring document and tedious examples (Terrorists! Child Abusers! Organised Crime! More Terrorists!) that wouldn't be fixed simply by speeding up the adoption of IPv6. If we're forcing the ISPs to spend money implementing something, why not make it something worthwhile.

0
3

This post has been deleted by its author

Silver badge
Facepalm

Hold on just a cotton pickin' minute....

Didn't the Conservatives abstain...when they weren't in power and Labour were touting something like this Snoopers Charter?

Didn't the Lib Dems abstain...when they weren't in power too?

Now Labour are going to kick up a stink...now they're not in power...

5
1
Silver badge

Another mystery play...

Seems Corbyns 'ethical' leadership is lacking when it comes to modern issues rather than 'old' issues from the 1980's like 'polaris'.

I swear, modern politics is like a medieval mystery play these days. Whip up the masses with threats of hellfire, up the tithe and keep the serfs in their place at all costs.

What was the point of all the drama at the last labour leadership contest? clearly nothing has changed with labour at all.

Rest assured, this brexit vote is just another drama designed to pull the wool over our eyes too.

7
0
Bronze badge
Big Brother

Re: Another mystery play...

"Seems Corbyns 'ethical' leadership is lacking when it comes to modern issues rather than 'old' issues from the 1980's like 'polaris'."

Given the lukewarm performance from Corbyn and considering the issues Labour could be really attacking and possibly bring down, Camerons government, there can be only one conclusion, it's not a real opposition, more like her Majesties loyal pretend Opposition .. 'but already it was impossible to say which was which.'

4
0
Silver badge

Re: Another mystery play...

Considering the amount of alarmist drama during the labour leadership from the 'new labour' plastic tories I'd hoped for some return to politics of real differing philosophies rather than the meaningless juxtapositioning of what can only be described as a bunch of clone corporate lackeys hoping to steal the 'contract' (to manage the country) from eachother by 'shiniest' advertising campaign and pithiest sound bite when both camps intend to do exactly the same half-assed job.

Seems we need to be argueing over indicting a monarch to get some real politics in this useless country.

5
0
Silver badge

I'm all for this bill

I'm all for this bill, with a small provision:

Those in a position of public responsibility, for example politicians, should demonstrate that there is nothing to fear from this domestic espionage by ensuring that all details about themselves, their families, their business acquaintances and their organisation / society memberships are all out in the open.

After all they have nothing to fear if they've done nothing wrong.

9
0
Unhappy

Referendum please?

Why are the public not being asked if they want this bill?

Democracy is dying - the terrorists are quietly winning, and the government is helping them by chipping away at our freedoms.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Referendum please?

It would make no difference. As Trump has demonstrated, a successful demagogue can get the masses to vote for anything they want with no facts whatsoever.

8
0
Silver badge

Re: Referendum please?

@Mycho

What happened to using Hitler as an example of a charismatic demagogue? Is Godwin dead?

2
0
Silver badge

Re: Referendum please?

@Red Bren

Hitler is ancient history. The overwhelming majority of voters know nothing about his electoral tactics, his religious pandering or the way he promised to keep the voters safe from ill-defined threats.

Trump is happenning right now, people can see him on television, and he's speaking English. Far more relevant.

As for Godwin, he's an overrated troll at best.

0
0
Silver badge

Re: Referendum please?

Honestly didn't expect a reply. For some reason I'm unable to select an icon for my posts, so couldn't flag that I wasn't serious, except to highlight the similarities between Hitler & Trump

0
0
Big Brother

Of course they're going to abstain

No MP is likely to actively vote against this bill when they already know that their every electronic secret is in the hands of the current Government.

5
0
Bronze badge

Burnham is the problem here, the spineless little shit.

2
0
Silver badge

Lords

Once again, it's left to the undemocratic House of Lords to uphold the rights of the people :(

3
0

Re: Lords

"Once again, it's left to the 'undemocratic' House of Lords to uphold the rights of the people"

FTFY

1
0

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

The Register - Independent news and views for the tech community. Part of Situation Publishing