Privacy Is Not An Absolute Right

Whatever the reality of the reach and activity of intelligence gathering, there is a public perception of intrusion and excess which must be assuaged.  Indeed, we sense that  there is significant and damaging public perception of a dishonest state targeting all individuals, regardless of specific suspicion.  This anxiety is reinforced by revelations and suspicions about Government actions in, for example, the case for war against Iraq, international intelligence cooperation and "rendition" and, of course, the conduct of British security forces in Northern Ireland.  It is clear that some sections of the public see this as an inexorable drift towards the practices and cultures which characterise the very totalitarian regimes that we are trying to defend ourselves against!

The simple truth is that the harder the people make it for the state to gather intelligence, the easier it becomes for terrorists and criminals to function.  It should not need a terrorist triumph to change public opinion on the need for robust and effective intelligence gathering.

This case for security and the impact that it will, necessarily, have upon freedom and rights must be made robustly and more effectively at all levels. The apparent public perception that mass collection (capability) necessarily results in mass untargeted surveillance must be proved as false. The public must be reassured that this and other beguiling myths promoted websites such as "Liberty" are untrue.  The case must be made with current and relevant issues (recognising the constraints of disclosing sensitive matters).  For example, although MI5, GCHQ and MI6 all testified as to the catastrophic damage caused by the Snowden betrayal, we did not see a counter-offensive from our politicians.

Neither will freedom will not be enhanced by picking at the carcass of the state, indiscriminately gorging on titbits that appear to offer protection from intrusion and “rightful” civil rights.  These rents in the fabric only undermine the overall capability of the state to protect our collective freedom. Human rights crusaders should be encouraged to  reflect on the sacrifices that were made to put them in their ivory tower in the first place.  The Liberal Democrat position is untenable.

 It is necessary to assure the public that intelligence gathering is properly targeted, unwarranted intrusion is avoided, indeed, illegal, and that, when intelligence is shared with foreign Governments proper regard is paid to UK law and the protection of the rights of UK citizens.  In short, trust must be re-established.  Once again, this will involve the Government doing "the right thing."  This will involve some plain speaking and tough decisions; a course of action upon which, lamentably, David Cameron cannot rely upon Liberal Democrat support.