Some more "drivel".

[Hetzer]

Labour's steady path to authoritarianism
By John Kampfner
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 19/10/2007

Have your say Read comments


Oppositions challenge power, governments hoard it. Pre-1997, Labour proclaimed its commitment to civil liberties. The Tories do so now. The Liberal Democrats say they are always liberal, but – unless they are knifing their leaders – few people seem to pay them much attention.

Now it matters. While all three parties seek to colonise similar ground on issues such as tax and public services, perhaps the most fertile and important battle has yet to be fought, between those who value individual rights and those who wish to sacrifice them on the altar of the state.

In his speech to last month's Labour conference, Gordon Brown declared: "I have no doubt that the best answer to disengagement from our democracy is to renew our democracy. And that means more change … change to strengthen our liberties to uphold the freedom of speech, freedom of information and the freedom to protest."

advertisementThree days later, Derek Pasquill, an official at the Foreign Office, was charged under the Official Secrets Act. The case is said to follow the publication in the New Statesman and elsewhere of a series of revelations highlighting dangerous government policy. The articles included an exposé of British acquiescence in the illegal shipment by America of terrorist suspects, and a number of disclosures about engagement with radical Islam.

The articles gave rise to a number of questions in Parliament, leading to cross-party support and significant shifts in policy. "Extraordinary rendition" (state-sanctioned kidnapping) had become a matter of deep shame for the British government. After the Statesman reported that ministers knew such actions would be illegal, this indefensible policy of tacit support for America was quietly dropped.

Much of the Government's original approach to radical Islam was formulated under Jack Straw. It was he who put the Muslim Council of Britain at the heart of consultation, almost to the exclusion of more moderate groups.

The revelations caused disquiet across Whitehall and led to a rethink even before Brown took over as Prime Minister. Senior government members have acknowledged the importance of the articles in helping them change policy.

So why the hounding of Mr Pasquill? The tactics appear designed to intimidate anyone in the Civil Service who has reservations about policy.

This follows a pattern of Whitehall bullying, of a Big Brother approach that has gathered pace under this Government. In October 2006, the Statesman reported that across Britain there are an estimated five million CCTV cameras — one for every 12 citizens, comprising a fifth of the world's cameras. Given that Britain occupies only 0.2 per cent of the world's inhabitable land mass, that is quite an achievement.

Add to that the folly of Labour's identity cards scheme, the wildly expansionist plans for a DNA database, and a recent decision – slipped through Parliament while nobody was noticing – to allow virtually every public body across the land access to citizens' telephone records, and a picture is emerging of a state out of control.

That overweening state is cracking down in other ways. Street protests are now frequently banned, and where they do take place, even the most uncontroversial ones are ostentatiously filmed by the police.

The most pro-Establishment voices are being silenced: outgoing ambassadors have just been told they are not allowed to send valedictory messages after decades of foreign service, in case they say anything controversial.

Most recently an edict was passed preventing ex-diplomats from commenting on anything, even after they are retired, unless it has been cleared.

The very serious requirement to uphold national security is now, as a matter of course, abused by civil servants and ministers in order to protect themselves from embarrassment. The case against Mr Pasquill is perhaps the most obvious example of that.

The issue of liberty cuts across all parties. Labour's steady path to authoritarianism is a matter of shame for anyone such as myself. It also presents a tailor-made opportunity for its political opponents, one that they should have the courage to pursue.
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!"

[Didge]

Very true.

Here's the link, so peeps can read the public feedback:-

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/10/19/do1903.xml