Big Brother Watch

Return of the sticker

First there was the rebellion.

Then the council strikes back - removing our sticker.

Now, the sticker has returned...

If you strike us down, we shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine...

Be careful when exiting the country

Dropping into my inbox this morning - a Home Office press release proudly announcing:

The UK's latest weapon in the fight against terrorists, known criminals and would-be illegal migrants was opened today by the Home Secretary Alan Johnson.

The National Border Targeting Centre (NBTC) is the UK Border Agency's hi-tech hub where watch-list checks on passengers entering and leaving Britain will be carried out.

The unit, based in Manchester, will replace the smaller Joint Border Operations Centre (JBOC) at Heathrow as the operational hub for e-Borders, which electronically checks passenger data before they even set foot on a plane.

As the release explains, the NBTC used to be housed at Heathrow in a building bearing the suspiciously Orwellian title 'Status Park 4'. From there it used a 'terrorist detector' database which - tied into the airlines' ticketing network - made judgments about travel habits and passengers' friends and family to decide if they were a security risk.

As a Mail on Sunday article from last year found, as well as being intrusive the system is beset by flaws and inconsistencies:

All the information passengers give to travel agents, including home addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, passport details and the names of family members, is shared with an unknown number of Government agencies for 'analysis' and stored for up to ten years.

An internal Home Office document obtained by The Mail on Sunday reveals that during testing one 'potential suspect' turned out to be an airline passenger with a spinal injury flying into Britain with his nurse.

'Suspect' requests likely to cause innocent holidaymakers to get 'red flags' as potential terrorists include ordering a vegetarian meal, asking for an over-wing seat and travelling with a foreign-born husband or wife.

The system will also 'red flag' passengers buying a one-way ticket and making a last-minute reservation and those with a history of booking tickets and not showing up for the flights.

A previous history of travel to the Middle East, Pakistan, Afghanistan or Iran will also trigger an alarm, as will those with a record of sponsoring an immigrant from any of these countries.

While there does need to be careful monitoring of the people travelling in and out of the country, this system is based on building a very intrusive picture of a passengers' travel history and the information they give to airlines and travel agencies when booking a flight. It is then logged on a government database and held for a decade.

The e-Borders scheme represents a very real threat to our freedom of movement. As journalist Alan Pearce wrote in a post for this site last year, there are already plans to force us to apply for an 'Exit Visa' before leaving the country.

By Dylan Sharpe 

How much more control can we stomach?

We're not the biggest fans of Meg Hillier MP here at Big Brother Watch Towers. The most compliant of the spineless drones that float around the Home Office, she staggers from embarrassing mistake to unintentionally hilarious error; but this latest idea really takes the biscuit. 

Yesterday, the parliamentary under-secretary of state at the Home Office, in a break between her relentless promotion of the National Identity Register in the North of England, floated the creation of an online ID card.

As The Northern Echo reports:

A Government minister has said identity cards for young people could be one way of keeping children safe on the internet.

Ms Hillier, who is also responsible for the national identity card scheme, said in Belgium, youngsters had identity cards.

She added: “Children have to prove they are children before they go on social networking sites.

“This isn’t Home Office policy, but there are various technical mechanisms. 

Not content with pushing the identity card scheme at a deeply sceptical population, Hillier is now trying to move people-tracking and ID surveillance online. 

The danger posed by paedophiles impersonating children on the internet is real - but it is one that can be countered with tough parenting rules for youngsters online rather than a catch-all policy that harms law-abiding people and leads to more surveillance and more government control. Children know not to get into cars with strangers because they have been taught to understand the risks - it is time parents treated chatting to strangers online with the same warnings.

But why let parents do the work when the government can interfere, eh?

By Dylan Sharpe

Guerrilla Sticker Campaign - Now it gets serious

We always suspected it would happen, but it is Wycombe District Council that has become the first local authority to challenge our name and shame sticker campaign.

The cause of Wycombe's discontent is the photo on the right, which we publicised on the blog last week.

Now the Bucks Free Press is reporting that they are coming after Big Brother Watch:

Council could prosecute over anti-CCTV stickers in High Wycombe

Wycombe District Council commented after the Big Brother Watch group published a photograph of one of its stickers on a pole in Frogmoor.

Spokesman Leanne Watson said: “Our street cleansing teams operate daily from 8am – 6pm and endeavour to clean up any incidences of graffiti or vandalism brought to our attention and where appropriate, would consider prosecuting anyone who defaces council-owned property.

As I say in the news report, if they want to come at us then we are ready. Do click on the image and take a closer look - you will see there is a sign on this lamppost that threatens a £500 fine for anyone caught 'defecating' on the street. Now either Wycombe has gone seriously downhill since I was last there or...

This threat is all the more disappointing given that in the past we have praised Wycombe for its approach to CCTV. But if they want to take on a liberty and privacy group over a solitary sticker...bring it on!

By Dylan Sharpe

If you want to get some stickers and rile your local council, send us your address and the number of stickers and we'll post them off to you forthwith. And while we're here - perhaps Islington Council could tell us what sort of 'dumping' constitutes a fifty grand - yes, £50,000 - fine? 

Q: When is an optional opt out not an option..?

A: When we're talking about your confidential medical records.

Most of you will already be aware of the Government's £11 billion 'Connecting for Health' scheme; which includes - among its several provisions - a plan to upload all of our medical records onto an enormous central database, accessible by seemingly anyone in the NHS.

These 'summary care records' are supposed to first be requested by your local GP, who offers you the opportunity to opt out.

..."supposed"...

From the Daily Telegraph this morning:

The British Medical Association claims that records have been placed on the system without patients’ knowledge or consent.

It follows allegations that the Government wanted to complete the project before the Conservatives had a chance to cancel it.

In a letter to ministers published today, the BMA urges the Government to suspend the scheme. Hamish Meldrum, its chairman, writes: "The breakneck speed with which this programme is being implemented is of huge concern.

"Patients’ right to opt out is crucial, and it is extremely alarming that records are apparently being created without them being aware of it.

"If the process continues to be rushed, not only will the rights of patients be damaged, but the limited confidence of the public and the medical profession in NHS IT will be further eroded."

The first point to note is that it is the BMA making this complaint: a body representing the very people whose lives these summary care records would apparently make much easier. But then, the BMA are far more concerned with the rights of the patient, unlike the politicians ramming this project through.

Medical records look set to be a big battleground at the forthcoming election and it is extremely important that our rights to privacy and concerns over the creation of yet another leaky state database are not ignored.

Big Brother Watch is currently conducting research into the security of our medical records, which we hope to release in the near future. In the meantime, if one of these letters lands on your doormat, we advise you to take-up the offer and opt out.

By Dylan Sharpe

Today is national No Smoking Day...

And so, whilst not a regular smoker myself, I shall be enjoying a cigar this afternoon, in kindred spirit with those most persecuted people in modern Britain, smokers.

Solidarity, comrades!

By Alex Deane

(All visitors please do click the link on Alex's name - Ed)

Powers of entry to private property - Lord Selsdon leads the way

Lord Selsdon's Bill limiting powers of entry by bureaucrats to private property is progressing. in the Lords - it is but the latest of his many admirable efforts to restrict the remarkably wide-ranging powers available to many officials up and down the country for a multiplicity of reasons. Big Brother Watch is proud to support him in his work and I am on the steering committee he's setting up to assist with the Bill and the aftermath.

You'll remember our recent research and event on this issue (which the great Lord S attended!).

We'll keep you posted on the progress of the Bill.

By Alex Deane

UN Official warns against "ineffective" body scanners

Our government won't listen, of course, as they're determined to have body scanners whatever the science and whatever the consequences - but I note that Martin Scheinin, the UN Human Rights Council’s Special Rapporteur on Counter-Terrorism, has said the scanners are more of a political response to terrorist attacks than a carefully designed security measure. Interestingly, he also said that technologies that intrude into privacy tend to be ineffective in preventing terrorism. Finally, Scheinin said this:

Full body scanners are ineffective in detecting a genuine terrorist threat if they do not reveal dangerous substances in body cavities, body folds or hand luggage. They may also give a false feeling of security and allow the real terrorists to adapt their tactics to the technology in use.

Quite.

By Alex Deane

Hat tip: Democracy Now

UK slides towards relegation in electronic surveillance league

US software company Cryptohippie have released a new piece of research (it is available to read by clicking here) addressing the extent to which states are electronically monitoring their citizens and ranking the results to produce a Premier League table of intrusive governments. The findings are typically depressing.

The research was conducted using 17 different criteria ranging from Border Issues (Inspections at borders, searching computers, demanding decryption of data) to Enforcement Ability (The state’s ability to use overwhelming force to seize anyone they want,whenever they want). Each criterion was assigned a value of between 1 and 5. A value of 1 indicating minimal development of electronic police state abilities in that area and a value of 5 representing full operation.

A similar report was released in 2008 and it would appear little has changed in the rankings. However more notably the raw scores, almost without exception, for each of the 52 states surveyed have increased.

If you click the image you can take a closer look at the mapped results (red indicates advanced electronic police states). It is clear to see the main offenders are Russia, China, the US, the UK but it should be noted that Spain has leapt a massive 22 places up the ranks.

We at Big Brother Watch think it is disheartening to see the UK sporting the deep red typically associated with Russia and China. Quite frequently we are reminded of the tyrannical regimes in China and North Korea yet in terms of electronic policing we are rotten eggs in the same basket. Despite the UK being leapfrogged for 5th place by the US (a statistic we would question given things like RIPA and the Digital Economy Bill), Alan Johnson et al should be crimson faced.

By James Stannard

Hat-tip: The Register

To arms!

You probably haven't seen this story before, but you've seen a dozen like it - overzealous, over-the-top prosecution of law-abiding person by authorities which chase politically correct agendas rather than target criminals.

Jim Railton is an auctioneer. He was given a lot to sell - a little wooden cabinet with some 19th century eggs in it. It was valued at £30. He put it up for sale.

He was arrested and treated like a criminal - he is now charged with two offences relating to the sale of bird eggs under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (an Act some 90 years younger than the eggs...). As Jim says,

"in retrospect, we should have just smashed the eggs. They are antique birds eggs, and all of common species, and had old paper copperplate hand-written labels on them.  It was a little oak chest, which we judged to be circa 1900.

We sell butterflies, shells, taxidermy – in fact just the type of things that come from people’s attics.  To be arrested for offering to sell this little chest seems absurd, and a complete waste of police time.  They have interviewed me twice, taken my fingerprints, swabbed me for DNA, had RSPB specialist inspectors visit Berwick to look at the eggs..."

Name and shame time - ridiculous attitude from the RSPB, who aggressively pursued this and caused the prosecution to come about. Even worse from Northumbria Police, who really ought to know better. Let's presume for a moment that they were right that this is an issue (which, of course, it's not, but play along...) - consider all the steps they could have taken before getting to this stage: (a) a friendly telephone call pointing out he'd unintentionally breached this rule; (b) a letter setting out a warning; (c) an in-person visit from a constable (we're already in OTT territory); (d) forbidding the sale; (e) summoning him for interview. But no; our masters really want to get this guy - because he's a law-abiding normal person who has strayed over a line - i.e. the favourite target for the authorities in modern Britain.

In the circumstances, Jim is understandably having a think about what to do next - get it all over with, or fight these ridiculous charges. Big Brother Watch has talked with him about assisting him in this unpleasantness which is of course disrupting his business and personal life; we begin by letting you know about it and calling for your help. For starters, you might like to visit their website and, if in the neighbourhood, support the business...

We are proud to support Jim in this ridiculous case. We have had some success with cases in the past and this is a prime example of the kind of overbearing, politically correct absurdity we were created to fight.

By Alex Deane