credit: PA
As well as being our new prime minister, Theresa May was last year named the "villain of the year" at the UK Internet Industry Awards for her investigatory powers bill, nicknamed the Snoopers' Charter. So, as Theresa May gets the keys to number 10, it's probably time to look at what this bill means and why it could be scary news for all of us and our online privacy.
The investigatory powers bill was published in November last year and it's the brainchild of May and the home office. It will mean that communication companies like Sky, BT and O2, will collect and hand over detailed records of everything you do online, from watching Ray Donavon to online gaming, shopping, gambling and watching porn. And it's not just the home secretary who will have access to this; the law will allow police and government departments, such as HMRC, to access this personal information. As well as this, online it would also keep records of calls and texts for a year.
Advert
May claims that the new bill will help the police to tackle the threat of extremism and identify paedophiles. And, of course, this is a good thing, but it will also remove the privacy of every single one of us.
Now, should we be worried about this? Well, not necessarily, for the main part. Unless you are a terrorist or otherwise up to no good it won't affect you, but that doesn't mean we should just let it happen without looking at the bigger issues it raises.
Supporters of the bill generally tell those who are worried about having their online life spied on that 'if you've done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to worry about', but if I've done nothing wrong then why should my personal communications be viewed at all?
The reason it gets under my skin is because they're taking something beautiful (the Internet) and ruining it by taking away one of the most important features of it - its anonymity. The Internet has long been a place to let out our inner weird. Got a fetish? Cool, look it up on the Internet and find out you're not alone. Spend five minutes on Reddit and find more NSFW stuff than you can shake a stick at, and I don't think I even have to mention PornHub. Best of all, you can do all of this while knowing you're safely behind your screen, away from scrutiny and embarrassment; many of us can truly be ourselves online, our weird selves.
Working here, I also have to search the Internet for seriously weird stuff. Now, I'm fine with people knowing I'm doing that, but what if I didn't want to people know? I'm not doing anything wrong, I don't watch anything that's illegal, so why should anyone be allowed to check up on that?
Those who oppose the bill are also concerned how safe the data will be and worry that the idea of such a mine of information would definitely be seen as a challenge for hackers.
Advert
Critics of the bill say that it's only justifiable for the government to monitor emails, texts, phone calls and browsing history if an individual is suspected of criminality, which seems fair enough. It's also a matter of concern for journalists who worry that the new laws could endanger journalists and their sources. Lawyers have also spoken up saying that it could undermine a client's right to talk to his lawyer in confidence.
Apple and the rest of the world's biggest tech companies have also said the bill is majorly flawed and that parts need to be re-written. The companies' main concern is that the new bill would have the power to break encryption technology - which Apple's iMessage and WhatsApp both use, to make sure that they can only be read by the people sending and receiving them. The new bill would allow the government to force companies to break that protection, if it's 'reasonably practicable'.
Credit: PA
Advert
The bill has opposition from Labour, the Lib Dems and even Conservative backbenchers, as well as from the parliamentary intelligence and security (ICS), however the bill has still had its second reading. And with May in charge then the odds of it going through seem even higher.
Bella Sankey, director of policy for human rights group Liberty, told The Guardian: "This bill would create a detailed profile on each of us which could be made available to hundreds of organisations to speculatively trawl and analyse. It will all but end online privacy, put our personal security at risk and swamp law enforcement with swathes of useless information."
A recent poll by Liberty found that a massive 92 percent who were aware of the proposals disapproved of them, but 72 percent of people asked said that they knew nothing about them.
At the end of last week, Theresa May did come forward with some new clauses including protection for journalists and medical records. Most importantly, this includes the privacy clause, which is designed to ensure that the new mass surveillance powers aren't used in situations where less intrusive means could be implemented. But is this enough? For me, no, it's not.
Advert
Words Claire Reid
Featured Image Credit: