Who’s Watching You?

The last two weeks we’ve been watching the BBC2 documentary series Who’s Watching You? about how Britain has become “one of the most watched places in the world”. For anybody paying attention to privacy issues there was little news, but what it did well was providing concrete examples of what for most of us is a fairly abstract fear.

The loss of our privacy through ubiquitous surveillance is one of the greatest hidden issues of the early twentyfirst century. It’s not just that new technology has made it easier to spy on us, but the way in which both government and business have embraced this technology, especially in the last decade or so, without too much public protest. For most of us this remains a theoretical issue unless it interferes with our daily lives. Which is why speed cameras are so much more loathed than CCTV cameras: one gets you fined, the other doesn’t. (And why there are so many fewer speeding cameras than CCTV cameras: one gets voters mad, the other doesn’t). What the programme did well was showing how this hidden surveillance could and did impinge on the lives of ordinary, middleclass people. What it did less well was taken a moral stand beyond “it’s complicated”.

One example I noticed in the second episode was that of the AA driver sacked for “making fraudelous use of company time”. The company’s timekeeping software reported that he had signed off too late after helping a customer, claiming a few minutes more than he needed, as well as arriving back from lunch three minutes late. That was enough for his managers to go over his record with a fine tooth comb, finding more “irregularities” and finally sacking him over it. He took his case to tribunal and won, as he had been smart enough to keep his own records. The narrator then went into his spiel about how this showed that surveillance can get you the cold facts, but not the context and that just relying on these facts can lead to the wrong conclusions. What he misses is a much more important point: that employees shouldn’t be subject to this sort of time management system in the first place.

A Good Day To Bury A DNA Database

police01a

The expenses scandal rolls on and on, and while it may be a disaster for the public’s faith in constitutional government, for New Labour it’s business as usual and every new day of scandal is just another good day for burying bad news.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith in particular must be chuffed to bits that the politerati’s bogged down in the mire of the expenses scandal; it all not only takes the heat off her personal travails, it lets her get on with dismantling democracy by the back door in decent peace and quiet:

Opposition parties and civil liberty groups united to condemn plans that are being steered through parliament while MPs are distracted by the expenses row.

The Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats claim the government is seeking to make controversial changes to the national DNA database via a “statutory instrument” because it fears losing a vote that would be required if they were introduced by the more conventional method of primary legislation.

A statutory instrument has to be discussed only by a specialist committee which meets for 90 minutes and is usually made up of 16 MPs and a chairman. Critics say the Labour MPs who will dominate the committee will be handpicked by government whips and therefore back the Home Office proposals

How to do things with rules, in a nutshell.

Wounded and weak though he is, Gordon Brown is still PM and intends to stay PM for the foreseeable future; he still wants to get his way and as we already know, bullying is one of his favoured methods of doing so. I’ll bet those MPs will be handpicked – handpicked to be lying awake nights fretting they’ll be found out about something.

I can only hope that because of the unauthorised publication of the unredacted reciepts (with more yet to come) that the whips have lost most of their coercive power over MPs. I can only hope too that enough MPs are roused by this blatant use misuse of procedure to ensure the DNA database isn’t bulldozed through via statutory instrument while there’s no Speaker and Parliament’s in turmoil.

Those are very faint hopes, though. What they’re fretting about nights may not even be expenses at all: milking allowances may be the least of some MPs’ sins. While the latest revelations are certainly juicy and indicative of the unscrupulousness greed of some MPs, not least the whips themselves, not all scandals are financial and the whips probably have plenty of even juicier stuff left to make members sweat with nervousness and suddenly decide to retire ‘because of health problems’.

I wouldn’t be at all surprised to find that publication of the reciepts has enabled whips to join the dots on some very questionable personal behaviour by some MPs. I think MPs will do what they’re told.

June General Election?

Twitter:

@AMitchellMP

The new speaker will only have a few weeks to get settled in before the election is called.

about 1 hour ago from web in reply to AMitchellMP

nickbrownmp
Nick Brown