Big Brother Britain

Brian Durrant
The Daily Reckoning
Dec. 24, 2006

We are experiencing the chill wind of technology driven authoritarianism and whether we like it or not it’s not going to go away. Increased surveillance of our daily lives is a fact of life; be it the DNA database, the growth of CCTV, the profiling of “would be offenders”, the continued hyping of the terrorist menace and advances in surveillance or security technology ostensibly to get us up to speed for the 2012 London Olympics.

Britain’s national DNA database is the largest and most advanced in the world. It’s a detective’s dream. Last year 20,000 people were convicted with the help of DNA evidence. Technicians can now get a DNA profile from an “ear print” left on a glass window and another new technique can identify offenders through a relative’s DNA. But there is a downside. DNA hoarding has grown massively under Mr Blair’s “control freak” administration. Initially DNA samples were only taken from those convicted of serious offences. But now the Criminal Justice Act 2003 allows the police to retain DNA samples from anyone who is arrested, irrespective of whether they are charged.

There are currently 3.6 million profiles on the database, representing 6% of the population, with more than 40,000 added each month, many of whom have never committed a crime. And this is only the thin end of the wedge. On a visit to the Forensic Science Service in October, the Prime Minister argued that the database should contain the “maximum number” of profiles possible. In other words we are not a nation of citizens but a nation of suspects.

Big Brother Britain: We lead Europe in spying on our citizens

The lasting legacy of the Blair administration has been the assault on privacy. We are the most spied-upon society in Europe. There are an estimated 4.2 million CCTV cameras in operation in the UK, more than the rest of the EU combined. An average person in Britain is being filmed 300 times a day. And that’s not all. Police and councils are considering monitoring conversations in the street using high-powered microphones attached to CCTV cameras. The microphones can detect conversations 100 yards away and record aggressive exchanges before they become violent. Police and councils in London have shown an interest in installing the technology before the 2012 Olympics. The theory is that police can intervene before an incident escalates, but experience tells us there must be serious doubts about the capacity of the police to respond.

On top of this, the Government is still keen to introduce a biometric ID card system linked to a national identity register. It also has plans to computerise our medical records and make them available to the police and security services. Meanwhile, the next census could include more intrusive questions on income and sexuality. The sciences of biometrics, intelligent photography and data processing are advancing at great speed and we are asked to swallow it as a harmless fact of modern life, essential for our security while decent law-abiding folk have nothing to fear. However, the idea that the innocent have nothing to fear rests on the assumption that official agencies are without prejudice and never make mistakes. This is a big ask. Data is a valuable commodity, which has a price. In the future our DNA samples may make it impossible for some of us to obtain medical or life insurance. Our personal data should be ours to give away to those we trust, not for the state to requisition when it sees fit.

Moreover, as the Government amasses more and more data, it can indulge its passion for profiling. Criminal profilers are drawing up a list of the 100 most dangerous murderers and rapists of the future even before they commit such crimes. Pilot projects to identify the highest-risk future offenders have been operating in five London boroughs for the last two months. The data used will include statements from former partners, information from mental health workers and details of past complaints. The aim is to stop these people who fit the high-risk profile from carrying out a lethal act by steering them towards “management programmes”. In essence, the authorities have plans to intervene in the lives of individuals before they actually commit a crime.

Big Brother Britain: Doctors to identify “strange personalities”

This may sound far-fetched but government thinking is already well advanced in this area. The Mental Health Bill, having been defeated in March, has been resurrected by the Government last month. The Government want to make it easier to detain people with personality disorders. It wants to impose on doctors the duty to speculate on the dangerousness of their patients who have as yet committed no offence but who have strange personalities, with a view to their indefinite preventative detention.

At the same time, it is strange that the state should refuse to take seriously what people have already done. In an arson attack a man killed four people including his former girlfriend who no longer wanted anything to do with him. Eight months earlier he had been released from prison after serving only three and a half years for killing a woman who refused to leave her husband for him. Indeed, the fact remains that hundreds of thousands of crimes are committed annually by convicted criminals who are on probation. Yet at the same time the state has the temerity to ask doctors to speculate what people who have done nothing may do in the future. It appears that the Government is using profiling as a device to distract us from its failure. The reality is that the police and the state are systematically moving the boundaries as to where they can exercise their powers but at the same time failing to carry out its first and most indispensable duty, to protect the lives of its citizens.

Moreover, in order for us to accept major intrusions into our privacy the state is always putting us on our toes with warnings about our security. We are told that hundreds of young British Muslims are being radicalised and set on the path to mass murder. Last month, Dame Eliza Manningham-Buller said that MI5 had identified 200 British-based terrorist networks and has a total of 1,600 suspects under surveillance. The Security Service’s caseload has risen by 80% since January, with 30 major terrorist plots under investigation. It is rare for the head of MI5 to speak out in public but the timing was very convenient for a government that wants to introduce ID cards and extend police powers to detain terror suspects up to 90 days without charge.

And the public are right to be cynical. Even after the foiling of the alleged aeroplane plot last August, 35% of people believed that British politicians “generally exaggerate the terrorist threat”. And who can blame them after the non-existent Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq.

Big Brother Britain: Terrorism obsession sidelines other crimes

Meanwhile, the Government’s obsession with terrorism has led to an abuse of power and a draining of resources to tackle mainstream crime. The Terrorism Act is not there to prevent people jeering as the Prime Minister’s chauffeur-driven car flashes by. Yet two policemen approached a harmless protester, searched him and took down his personal details in accordance with the Terrorism Act. At the same time as people who work in forensics are told that terrorism is a priority, the solving of mundane crimes that blight our lives is seriously affected.

But the Government’s passion for technology to solve its problems remains undiminished. The reasons are straightforward. Technology expands the powers and reach of the state. Its eye-catching nature distracts us from the Government’s failure in its duty to protect us. Moreover, it is an indispensable tool because some communities are disintegrating at the grass roots level. According to a recent report by the Institute of Public Policy Research we live in growing fear of our teenage population. The research found that 65% of Germans, 52% of Spanish, 50% of Italians would step in if they saw a group of 14-year-olds vandalising a bus shelter, but only 14% of Britons would intervene, fearing verbal or physical attack. Meanwhile, the intimidation of would be witnesses is so great and their protection so feeble that the state has to rely on technology to amass the evidence necessary to secure a conviction.

In the absence of personal responsibility and consideration of neighbours, the Government feels that it has no choice but to embrace technology to keep us in check. Big Brother is here to stay...so get used to it!