Thursday, 7 December 2006

Public Wish for More Surveillance - Not Me, Mate

This is interesting. Not that the government is using terrorism to regiment and survey its people during their lawful business in the most intrusive way, assuming that all passengers are potential terrorists; no, that is to be expected. What is interesting is this:

Passengers are ready to accept airport-style security screening at certain railway stations, Transport Secretary Douglas Alexander has said.
A trial of X-ray body scanners and other machines will report shortly, Mr Alexander told MPs.

But he said initial findings suggested passengers "understood the need" for extra security.

People, says the government, wish to be watched more closely; people, declare the government, want the state to assume they are deadly radicals when they're on their way up the Northern Line. The article does not make clear who was asked about this.

The Dept of Transport website does not exactly promote it either, and a short search doesn't turn up the survey or its methodology.

Mr Alexander said the threat of a terrorist attack in the UK remained "severe". way of a final little reminder to everyone to accept surveillance if they hadn't already. It is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid the thought that this government wants to create and sustain an atmosphere of fear, in which communities are divided against each other, hatred and ignorance increase, and intrusion into daily life is normal.

This benevolent government has made or is to make great use of:

300 000 cctv cameras
6000 speed cameras
cameras at rubbish tips

...and many other methods, including chips in bins, company use of data sold by govenrment or other companies, the new NHS database, posted on below, ID cards, and the new transport plan, which will involve almost continuous surveillance of millions of vehicles.

Apart from occasional grumbling, we seem to have agreed that we must be watched all the time, whether to "save lives", or "protect the environment" or whatever; but the fact is, we're giving the government too much license to assume that we are murderous, world wrecking bastards who would destroy everything given half a chance, and that only the benevolent, extended government can stop us. Why can't we have a government that respects us as citizens (rather than which denigrates us as "polluters") and engages us as adults?

No: that would be too much to ask. MPs pay rise? Why not? Creating a feverish atmosphere of suspicion and intolerance doesn't come cheap you know.


james higham said...

...Transport Secretary Douglas Alexander has said...

If the blogosphere didn't link or quote the surveys used, we'd be very soon rapped on the knuckles by other bloggers. Yet the government can seemingly say anything without let or hindrance.

The Tin Drummer said...

Come off it, James, this is just another way in which the blogosphere is inferior to the MSM and guess I'll go and stick my head in a bucket of water.