Twitter joke trial - conviction quashed in High Court

The origins of this case go back 2 1/2 years when a man, Paul Chambers, posted a message on Twitter which read: "Crap! Robin Hood Airport is closed. You’ve got a week and a bit to get your shit together otherwise I am blowing the airport sky high!!" in relation to the closure of Robin Hood Airport in January 2010 because of adverse weather conditions. Paul Chambers had been intending to fly to Northern Ireland to meet someone he had earlier 'met' through exchanges on Twitter. No-one amongst followers who read the message soon after it was posted seems to have found the message alarming in any way, they treated it as a joke. This happened on 6th January 2010; five days later on 11th January an off-duty security employee of the airport was apparently searching at home for any mention of 'Robin Hood Airport' on Twitter and came across the 'offending' tweet and although he thought it was just a joke he reported it to his 'line manager' who thought likewise, but 'in accordance with procedure' reported it to the airport police who thought likewise also, again 'in accordance with procedure' reported it to South Yorkshire Police who, on balance, thought likewise (that it was a joke and not a credible threat, just to drive the point home), after however arresting Mr Chambers and interrogating him. Next the matter was referred by South Yorkshire Police to the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) who decided there was a case to answer. As a result Mr Chambers was charged, prosecuted and convicted at a Magistrates Court with the conviction later upheld on appeal before Doncaster Crown Court in March 2011.

The High Court has now overturned the conviction (read the full judgement of the High Court here (.pdf file)), basically because there was no criminal intention or act - in other words it was a joke.

I remember hearing about this case soon after Mr Chambers was arrested in January 2010 and thought the whole idea of him being arrested was completely ridiculous and indeed a 'joke', although of course no joke for Mr Chambers who lost his job and effectively became unemployable.

No-one involved in investigating this case, at whatever level, seems seriously to have believed that the offending tweet was anything but a joke, perhaps in poor taste, but a joke nonetheless. Nevertheless the jobsworth mentality involved in following processes dictated by 'in accordance with procedure' meant that in order for those involved to protect their own backs (read the linked article on 'jobsworth' for more on this) they had to report it on up the chain, even though none of them thought there was any credible threat or risk. Indeed in the High Court deliberations the point was made that even after the relevant tweet was noticed by the off-duty airport security employee there was no evidence of any increase in the 'threat alert' at the airport or indeed that any other action was taken at the airport as a result of the tweet. So, all these jobsworths did what the rules said they had to do, this includes the CPS, just in case, one supposes, anything untoward did occur they could not later be held to have overlooked their duties.

Until of course the High Court comes along and, rightly, concludes that Mr Chambers had contravened no law so had no case to answer.

I'm afraid I must also introduce an element of raw partisan politics into this murky affair, because this touches directly upon the freedom of expression of all of us - as is pointed out here, a climate of fear grew up (and was actively fostered by the Labour government by their deeds and actions, as exemplified by the reference to Home Office advice in the linked article, not to mention the Labour supporter being physically ejected from a Labour Party conference for heckling, which I wrote about here) which led many people to worry unnecessarily about saying what is in their minds - not just the usual and sensible prohibition on shouting "Fire!" in a crowded public place when there is not in fact a fire (or saying at the airport check-in "I have a bomb in my bag" for a joke, as another example). The quashing of Mr Chambers' conviction goes a little way toward re-establishing freedom of expression in this country! And perhaps will allow Mr Chambers to get a job, too.

The Conservative-LiberalDemocrat agreement

The agreement signed yesterday between the Conservative and LiberalDemocrat parties to frame their relationship in the new ruling coalition has now been published and can be downloaded here.

This initial agreement document is not very long and is worth reading in full. Of particular interest to me (although other parts of the document are of great importance, too) is point 10., which covers the broad issue of Civil iberties and I quote this section below in full:

Conservative Liberal Democrat coalition negotiations Agreements reached 11 May 2010 - 10. Civil liberties The parties agree to implement a full programme of measures to reverse the substantial erosion of civil liberties under the Labour Government and roll back state intrusion. This will include: A Freedom or Great Repeal Bill. The scrapping of ID card scheme, the National Identity register, the next generation of biometric passports and the Contact Point Database. Outlawing the finger-printing of children at school without parental permission. The extension of the scope of the Freedom of Information Act to provide greater transparency. Adopting the protections of the Scottish model for the DNA database. The protection of historic freedoms through the defence of trial by jury. The restoration of rights to non-violent protest. The review of libel laws to protect freedom of speech. Safeguards against the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation. Further regulation of CCTV. Ending of storage of internet and email records without good reason. A new mechanism to prevent the proliferation of unnecessary new criminal offences.

If these plans are carried through, and I hope they are implemented fully and rapidly, it will be nothing less than the destruction of the 'Police State' the previous Labour government has been busy implementing these part 13 years.

Quite apart from all the other sensible and pragmatic matters touched upon in the Coalition agreement, the section on 'Civil Liberties' does it seems to me justify a special celebration!

ECHR judgement against UK government on Terrorism Act 2000 s44 'stop and search' abuses

Where would we be without the excellent Spy Blog which does it usual sterling job of highlighting the failings (and the malign policies) of our current shambles of a government - shambolic and authoritarian to boot!

As Spy Blog correctly mentions (as I have pointed out here and in comments elsewhere many times over the years) the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is NOT a body within the EU (the European Court of Justice fulfils that role). The ECHR has ruled against the UK government for its systematic abuse of human rights by its use of the Section 44 'stop and search' provisions of the Terrorism Act 2000 without reasonable cause and is thus in contravention of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The abuse has occurred against photographers, tourists, trainspotters and, amazingly, Members of Parliament.

Will our government pay a blind bit of notice to this ruling (any more than it has to the ruling about the retention of the DNA samples of innocent people, which it lost over a year ago)? We badly need an election to rid ourselves of our dictatorial and, I don't believe I am being in any way melodramatic when I add 'proto-fascist' government, with its [unfortunately rather successful] efforts to turn the UK into a Police State.

Peter Mandelson and the "Digital Economy Bill"

A most illuminating YouTube dissection of the Digital Economy Bill being piloted through Parliament by Lord Mandelson by someone called Dan Bull - a pretty professional effort and ejoyable, too:



(thru the Spectator 'Coffee House' here - main page here)

Wardog - now an "ex blog"

(Please see UPDATE at end)

I just read an article in the Wardog blog tonight in which he indicates that he is hanging up his 'blogging clogs'. Unfortunately I haven't been reading his, or any other, blog much in the past few days because I have my own family concerns right now and besides been very busy with setting up a new website and these matters have been consuming more or less all of my waking houurs (not to mention giving me sleepless nights of late), but his final message indicates that he has been going through a rough time and has had various pressures exerted upon him which he says have left him with no alternative but to cease blogging. All his earlier articles have now been removed, as well as all his links, etc. (NB/ Note added 21NOV09 19.25 GMT - the 'Wardog' blog has now been taken down completely. Let's hope the writer is resurrected elswehere.)

To be clear, I always found Wardog a stimulating read. I rarely agreed with anything he wrote - he being what I would call a 'rabid' Nationalist and me being unapologetically in favour of Scotland continuing as a partner in the United Kingdom. I have absolutely no truck with the aims of the SNP, nor really the Devolution disaster that Labour has saddled us with, even if I've come to accept reluctantly that there is no going back to the status quo ante. In the greater scheme of things, Labour have more serious things to answer for - just as an example they have trashed the economy, just as every Labour government before it has done; Mr Brown is the very last person I ever, and not just in the past couple of years, could associate with the term 'prudence'.

However, I don't need people to agree with me before I am happy to acknowledge that they have worthwhile (if in my opinion often misguided) things to say. I certainly don't like people being coerced into silence because of what sound like the tactics of a Police State. But as I have been writing here for quite a few years now, that is just what the UK is becoming, or indeed may well have become if this latest incident and a number of others in the recent past are any indication; I've been writing as much for several months now. Freedom of expression, however objectionable some of the opinions expressed may be, is a vital thing and not to be surrendered lightly.

I have never made any secret here of the contempt in which I hold Labour (and the 'New' variety is just as objectionable as the traditional version of that noisome Party), nor frankly do I have a higher opinion of the fantasists in the SNP, or their sympathisers such as I think it safe to say Wardog numbered himself. But that does not mean to say I am not outraged when I learn that he has felt threatened both personally and professionally by what seem to be the actions of people who take have taken exception to what he has been writing. It is truly, truly outrageous!!

UPDATE: (Sunday 22NOV09 21.30 GMT) I've just come across an amusing, and pretty accurate, commentary today on Wardog's woes in the Nationalist Mythbusting blog (written by someone who operates under the perplexing of name 'sm753') - you can read it here. Incidentally, and I should have mentioned this when I was writing this article a few days ago, but in some of the articles in the Nationalist Mythbusting earlier this month there are many of what can only be described as 'obsessive' comments from said Wardog. I always try and be fair to people when I write my articles, but it's only fair to point out that Wardog often came across in his online persona as a bit of a 'nutter'; my view is simply that even 'nutters' should have the right to express themselves verbally within reason - and if someone has a genuine grievance that they have been libelled then they can take the matter to law. However the behind-the-scenes threats that evidently have been made against Wardog are noisome in the extreme.

V for Vendetta - future documentary or fiction?

I had not seen (or indeed heard of) the wonderful film V for Vendetta until yesterday evening when it was shown on BBC3 - I have recorded it and am watching it now whilst recording it onto DVD for my film library. Here's a video-clip of the speech made by 'V' over the hijacked 'British Television Network' near the beginning of the film, where he reveals to the whole nation, and its infuriated dictatorial rulers, what his plans are to bring to an end the dictatorship the country labours (*) under:



It is scarily like what Britain, after 12 years of an increasingly authoritarian Labour government, is in process of becoming. Of course the old canard (i.e. nakedly propagandistic lie) runs through the movie that the authoritarian regime portrayed in it is somehow extreme 'right-wing' (even going so far as to portray the instigator of it as a former member of the Conservative Party), when in fact it has much more in common with real-life extreme 'left-wing' authoritarian regimes of the past - notably the former Soviet Union and even more the National Socialist regime that seventy years years ago ruled Germany. I do not say, or believe, that we in Britain are currently anywhere near reaching the level of authoritarianism portrayed in this film, but the building-blocks to take us there are indeed being put into place by our current Labour government - to mention just a few these include a number of 'enhancements' such as an ever-growing DNA database, a national population database register, ID Cards and massive use of CCTV surveillance (the most extensive of any country in the world). Getting rid of Labour at the next general election is only the first step necessary to put the country back onto a better path - a lot of legislation put in place since 1997 needs to be repealed and we must ensure than whoever forms the incoming government (most likely, on current trends, to be from the Conservative Party) does this and we must use any opportunity between now and the election to cajole and badger them into committing themselves to do so and to fulfill commitments already made in this regard.

(*) - and I use that particular verb quite deliberately.

Tear gas attacks in Tehran - Saturday 20 June 2009

Some more video-footage of yesterday's demonstratons in Tehran, violently put down by the authorities with tear gas attacks:

Tehran - Saturday 20 June 2009

WARNING: The first of the two embedded video-clips below shows the death of a young woman in Tehran yesterday. It is very explicit. If you prefer not to see it, do not press the 'play' icon.










Death of a young woman in the street in Tehran yesterday




A recording of the demonstrations in Tehran yesterday




(both thru Barcepundit)

Blears driven before the cameras by the Brown 'enforcers' with a cattle prod?

Forgive this old cynic his moment of retching, but the spectacle today of Hazel Blears [forcibly?] atoning for her 'sins' in criticising the 'Dear Leader' stretches my credulity way beyond breaking-point!

It makes her sound like a complete 'ninny' as if she had no inkling of the effect her actions were likely to have. As if! I may not like her politics, but she has always struck me as a lady who is pretty astute and with a fair dose of common sense. If her actions had resulted in the desired outcome (the departure of the 'Dear Leader') I doubt if we would have been subjected to this nauseating exercise in attempted manipulation of public opinion. It is clear that Brown is following the same kind kind of ritual humiliations inflicted on transgressors in the real-life former Soviet Union, the present-day North Korea or the theoretically purely-fictional Oceania as depicted in the novel 1984 - which I have come to believe Labour would dearly desire to recreate here on 'Airstrip One'. BBC reporting of Blears's remarks today seems dutifully to follow the 'Party line' with no effort to achieve a modicum of balance in its coeverage - as on so many occasions in recent years.

By the by, it was most amusing to see Peter Hain on 'Question Time' last night attempting to bluster his way through what must have been a very uncomfortable evening for him; his visible shock (possibly he might have gone pale briefly, but it was difficult to tell given his usual 'orange' hue) when a member of the audience, an employee of LDV, assured him that whilst this government may have forgotten them, they would not forget Labour - at the time of the next General Election; one could see in his eyes for a brief few seconds a man who knows that Labour is headed for [near-]oblivion when the next general election comes along.

Paedophile rings and the ways they can be tracked, exposed and punished

I saw with shock reports a week or so ago about what was being described as the most serious case of systematic organised paedophilia in Scotland. Another useful link to this story is here.

I just came across a blog post from around the same time as the two media links above in the ever-excellent Spy Blog which takes the writer's usual clinical and detailed look at different aspects of how this case was cracked. It is a very lengthy and complicated article, but will repay the effort to read it in full and [in my case attempt to] absorb it all.

Moscow police break up Slavic 'Pride'

There have been a number of arrests this morning in Moscow by police of gay rights activists taking part in a PRIDE march. Even more sinister are these closing sentences in the BBC report:

The city authorities had outlawed the parade saying it was morally wrong. Permission has been given for a counter-demonstration by nationalist and religious groups.

Now that the Netherlands has been knocked out of this evening's Eurovision Song Contest (BBC microsite), will any of the other contestants have sufficient backbone to boycott the event?

I'd like this to be a fun evening, but quite frankly not at the price of accepting meekly this travesty! I hope some at least of the western contestants can make clear their views by, for example, displaying rainbow badges somewhere on their costumes or something else like that, even if they don't feel able to mount a full boycott themselves.

Police State USA

I have over the course of the past several years headlined quite a large number of articles in my Police State Britain series and I've been thinking of doing the same for a while now (three or four years at least) with some of the stories coming out of the US. Now with this story I think the time has come - naturally it involves the Patriot Act. This time it has been used against a barely sixteen year old youth in North Carolina. He may well be all the bad things that the FBI are alleging, who knows, but it sure does look like either a complete nonsense (cloned identity?) or a wildly-exaggerated case of a teenager playing a prank which has gone seriously wrong. In any case very little of what he is suspected of is required to be released under the Patriot Act - basically people can be locked away more or less indefinitely with little or no 'due process'. It would certainly be reassuring to see the case heard openly in a regular court, if that's what it is decided is warranted and not in some kind of Kafka-esque modern-day Inquisition, from which no-one is safe.

And this, three months into the Presidency of a so-called 'Democrat' president?

(thru Andrew Sullivan writing here)

Police State Britain - Government proposes 2-tier NHS as ID card bribe

Really, this Labour government is utterly shameless! And duplicitous to boot!

Its latest gimmick to try and foist the unwanted ID card system on us is to suggest that military veterans could be issued with 'special' identity cards, so entitling them to 'priority NHS treatment, access to housing and discounts on public transport by using the cards'.

A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman is quoted as saying:

"We are actively investigating the options of an ID card for veterans that could guarantee identity thereby helping to secure access to services and discounts."

- note the careful wording; I'll get back to this a little later.

Minister for veterans Kevan Jones said the government needed "to make it happen" and speaking to the Independent newspaper is quoted as saying:

"We will provide veterans' ID cards so the person can say, 'I have served in the services,' and get priority access to treatment."

- this from the government, mark you, which closed military hospitals, forcing many seriously-injured soldiers to be in shared wards in NHS hospitals where many of the staff had no expertise whatsoever in dealing with patients with the kinds of physical and emotional injuries they had suffered! It makes me want to spit!

As for the 'careful wording' I referred to earlier, this statement by a Ministry of Defence spokeswoman seems to imply that the MoD will issue ID Cards; I believe they do issue military identity cards to serving personnel, but thiis seems to deliberately confuse the issue by conflating these with national identity cards, which will be issued under the auspices of the Home Office, who would presumably issue them to veterans as well.

As for entitlement to 'special treatment' (have these people no knowledge at all of history??!!), their military service entitles them to care tailored for their needs, not to be shunted off into NHS hospitals where neither the staff nor their fellow-patients may have much understanding of their needs. This attempt to bribe people to carry an ID card is unlikely to fool many people, particularly not those brave individuals, now veterans, who have fought this country's wars to preserve our freedoms, which this odious government seems so keen to curtail. Labour has over the years said it believes in 'equality'; now it wants to separate the population into two classes - and how is a doctor to make the decision, based on medical criteria, that one class of people (non-veterans) will henceforth be relegated to a government-approved second-tier status when seeking medical treatment? I thought the credo of the NHS was "free at the point of need".

I believe those who have served their country need to be treated with dignity and receive the treatment they require. They should not be used as a tool in this despicable way to further Labour's political agenda, by this 'on the cheap' quick-fix! How do they think military personnel/veterans will be viewed by those patients who are shoved further down the queue to make way? With some resentment inevitably. The Labour government may wish to try and dress this up as a 'privilege' for those who served their country; what it will in fact do is drive a wedge between segments of the population.

How stupid do Labour really think we are?

Police State Britain - Clause 152 being withdrawn

After widespread outrage across the country and opposition in Parliament from the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, the government has agreed to withdraw the highly-objectionable and unjustifiable Clause 152 of the Coroners and Justice Bill which I wrote about in January here and which, according to Justice Minister Michael Wills the government now accepts was "drawn too widely" - however, before everyone cheers too loudly, the government minister's weasel-words included the remark that it would be redrafted; Mr Wills said it was not a U-turn but the "proper process of parliamentary scrutiny" and added:

"What should happen with legislation is that the government brings it to ... Parliament and it is then scrutinised and when on occasion the opposition make a reasonable point, we respond appropriately. "In this particular case it became clear that the powers were drawn too widely. We've therefore withdrawn them and we will be redrafting them and bringing forward the powers in future."

- so the government still wants to have the powers which the withdrawn clause would have given them legislated into being using a new form of words which they hope will not 'frighten the horses' in quite the same way. The new wording, when resubmitted, will have to be scrutinised very closely to ensure that the government's obvious aim is thwarted! The 'Police State' hasn't gone away (how could it have when the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 has just come into force?!) it has only perhaps been diverted slightly. Continuing vigilance remains essential!

Police State Britain - just another telling incident

Still under any illusion that Britain is not a 'Police State'?

Watch this:
"Man arrested on suspicion of photographing a drain"


You can read the full story here, where I came across the video-clip.

NB/ Channel M is apparently a television broadcaster available only in the Manchester ares, either through an aerial or by satellite.

Police State Britain - Day 1 - 16 February 2009

Britain is now to all intents and purposes a 'Police State'; it is not a grim reality for the future. It is here and now.

Why do I write this? Well, as from yesterday (16 February 2009 - 'a date which will go down in infamy', as the US President said when apprised of the surprise Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour in December 1941) you are open to criminal charges under the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 if you 'attempt to solicit' the name or address of a serving or former police office, or photograph them. Naturally there is absolutely no provision in that Act to limit police powers to photograph ordinary citizens. I have written before about this iniquitous legislation here and here.

Even this is not the worst part of this legislation worthy of a Fascist state! As the second linked article above makes clear, the new Act permits in addition that agents of the State may use official burglars or undercover agents to steal property in an effort covertly to sample your DNA or fingerprints.

As the illegal killing of the innocent Brazilian Jean-Charles de Menezes has demonstrated, the police can kill an innocent person in our capital city, lie about it, and not be held to account or anyone punished for the crime. If this were to happen to someone you know and love how would you react? Well tough, this is Police State Britain and there is probably very little you could do to obtain justice, any more than could the family of Mr de Menezes.

Quite apart from sending our economy down the tubes, our Labour Government has undone centuries of struggle to obtain protection for the citizen against the capricious powers of an over-weening State. I hope those who voted Labour in 1997, 2001 and 2005 are proud of what they have achieved. I hope that the electorate will not make the same mistake at the next general election. It will require determination on all our parts to ensure that a future government repeals or amends much of the legislation which now forms the foundations of Labour's Police State - it is unlikely to be done voluntarily.

Police State Britain - ten day countdown begins

In ten days time this country will become a 'Police State'.

I'm mourning for my country.

To see what I am talking about, please see here. The full text of the Counter Terrorism Act 2008 is here.

How likely is it, do you think, that a future Conservative government will repeal all the legislation that has led us into this dystopian nightmare?

The video below relates to a period shortly before the new Act comes into force, to demonstrate how other laws are already being used to try and prevent us, you and me, from filming in public places, despite there being a Common Law right to do so. The new law, when it comes into force in ten days time will, quite simply, to all intents and purposes take that and a number of other rights away. And the loss of the right to film in public places is not even the most important or frightening aspect of the new Act - legalising official 'burglary' to obtain DNA samples illictly seems like a pretty conclusive statement of what we as a country will soon become. It is that stark.



I've already included the following video-clip in another post, but include it again without apology because it shows what the police aleady do when they think they are unobserved (this dates from just a few months ago); in future they will have the right to enforce a prohibition on filming of their activities:

Coroners and Justice Bill - a letter from my MP

(Please see UPDATE at end)

I wrote an article here 10 days ago about the Second Reading last Monday in the House of Commons of the Coroners and Justice Bill and that because of what is proposed in Part 8 of the Bill it was imperative to try and mobilise support from MPs to ensure that this part of the Bill never passes into law, at least in the form it currently takes.

I am pleased to report that I have this morning received a letter back from my own MP confirming that his Party (the Liberal Democrats) opposes this legislation and that their shadow Justice Secretary, David Howarth, spoke in the debate last Monday saying that the proposals were "outrageous and should be withdrawn. They alone jusstify rejecting this bill". Danny Alexander MP (my MP) also confirms that this vociferous opposition will continue in coming weeks as the Bill continues its passage through Parliament.

Although I am not a supporter of the Liberal Democrats, I wish to record that on this as on a number of other issues relating to civil liberties they have consistently been on the correct side of the argument (for example their opposition to the introduction if ID Cards).

UPDATE: (Tuesday 3FEB09 18.10 GMT) I noticed through my visitor statistics that this post has been viewed today from the Christian Institute server. My 'default attitude' toward this group is that the people behind it have vile ideas; however, they are just as entitled as anyone else not to have their confidentiality violated as clauses 151-154 of the Coroners and Justice Bill would potentially give rise to if it passes into law, so if this is why they were looking at my site, then fair enough. Otherwise, stay away!

BoJo on Blair

The name's Blair, Sir Ian Blair. London Mayor Boris Johnson didn't think much of this man, or his handling of his job whilst Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, some time before he became Mayor. And told him so in a startlingly-frank exchange of correspondence. Well done, Boris!


I called for Blair to be sacked as long ago as September 2005, then in January 2006 urged him to shut up, as it was becoming very clear he seemed to have a habit of speaking without first thinking, so I reacted with great pleasure last October when news that he had resigned emerged, helped on his way by the self-same Boris Johnson. I repeat: Well done, Boris!

(thru Fraser Nelson writing at the Spectator 'Coffee House')

Police State Britain - Clause 152 of the Coroners and Justice Bill

URGENT! ACT NOW!

You can find the Coroners and Justice bill on the UK Parliament website here and the full text in .PDF format is here and clauses 151-154, referred to below, are on pages 107-120 (* - see at end; see also '+' at end) of this .PDF online version of the Bill).
The Ministry of Justice website page on the Coroners and Justice Bill is here.

I have received the following in an email from no2id:

This is one of the most serious threats to our liberty and privacy we've yet seen. Please read this carefully, and act now. The government is trying to remove all limits on the use of our private information by officials. This means taking your information from anywhere and passing it anywhere they like - including medical records, financial records, communications data, ID information....anything at at all. The Database State is now a direct threat, not a theory. Clause 152 of the Coroners and Justice Bill, due for its first debate in the Commons on Monday 26th January, would convert the Data Protection Act into its exact opposite. It would allow ministers to make 'Information Sharing Orders', that can alter any Act of Parliament and cancel all rules of confidentiality in order to allow information obtained for one purpose to be used for another. This single clause is as grave a threat to privacy as the entire ID Scheme. Combine it with the index to your life formed by the planned National Identity Register and everything recorded about you anywhere could be accessible to any official body. Quite apart from the powers in the Identity Cards Act, if Information Sharing Orders come to pass, they could (for example) immediately be used to suck up material such as tax records or electoral registers to build an early version of the National Identity Register. But the powers would apply to any information, not just official information. They would permit data trafficking between government agencies and private companies - and even with foreign governments. They would permit government departments to obtain information from private companies and individuals, too. THIS IS WHY WE MUST ACT NOW! We need you to do three things: 1) Please write straight away IN YOUR OWN WORDS to your MP via http://www.WriteToThem.com - do it this weekend, if not before. The Bill is being rushed through Parliament, even as we write. Ask your MP to read Part 8 (clauses 151 - 154) of the Coroners and Justice Bill, and to oppose the massive enabling powers in the "Information sharing" clause. The Bill contains a number of controversial provisions, but to the casual reader it appears mainly to be about reforming inquests and sentencing. It is due its Second Reading in the Commons on 26th January 2009. Request your MP demand that the clause be given proper Parliamentary scrutiny. This is something that will affect every single one of their constituents, unlike the rest of the Bill. There is a grave danger that the government will set a timetable that will cut off debate before these proposals - which are at the end of the Bill - are *even* discussed. 2) Write letters to your local papers. Point out that this will affect every single person in the country. Highlight the fact that the information sharing powers in this Bill are overwhelmingly unpopular *- when people know about them - and that they are being sneaked in without publicity*. A YouGov poll in the Sunday Times on 18th January (details here: http://forum.no2id.net/viewtopic.php?p=100808 ) shows that the public opposes these new powers by a factor of 3 to 1 *against* - 65% of people asked said they would give government "too much power", only 19% thought not. 3) Tell as many people as you can. And find out more yourself. We have created a new page on the website dedicated to 'data sharing' which contains links to the key documents and a brief explanation of each. Please read it, and pass on this link: http://www.no2id.net/datasharing.php Let your friends, family, colleagues and anyone who might share our concerns know that the battle for their privacy is happening NOW. The more people we reach, the more we hope will act.

Don't complain later if you or someone you know or care for is affected by this pernicious legislation and you have done nothing now! - Write to your MP!

(PS/ I have just written to my own MP on this matter; I look forward to seeing if Danny Alexander MP, or another MP, takes up this matter during the parliamentary debate next Monday.)
* - a commenter kindly pointed out I had made an error in noting the pages concerned, so I have now amended them. Thanks.
+ - and the same commenter has added a further useful detail: "and because I'm a bit sad, and actually read the whole thing (and commented too quickly as it turns out), you can add 'Schedule 18' which is the substance of clause 154. Schedule 18 can be found on pages 185-190." Thanks again.