Proof if any were needed that Jack Straw has completely lost the plot is demonstrated by comments he has made in The Guardian. The classic one is as follows;

“I’m the first to accept that Labour since 1997 has not achieved a state of grace in terms of the crucial balance between security and liberty. But on any objective basis, this government has done more to reinforce and strengthen liberty than any since the war.”

Well apart from the fact that this statement is a classic case of ‘doublespeak‘ his claim that his government has reinforced and strengthened liberty is utter rubbish. New Labour have effectively suspended Habeas Corpus; have supported the introduction of 4.2m CCTV cameras, one for every 12 people in this country; have taken and then retained DNA on people that have never been charged or have been acquitted; have introduced and now seek to strengthen the rules related to a Communications Database which will record every telephone call, text message and email we send, as well as our internet browsing habits; have announced their intention to set up a ‘Travel Database’ which will record when we go on holiday, with whom, for how long, how much it cost, how we paid etc; have introduced ContactPoint a database that will record every aspect of our children’s lives from the moment they start school and then increased the number of people that will have access to this information; have announced their intention to force ID cards upon us, inspite of massive public resistance; have announced the intention to introduce biometrics onto our passports, with a chip that could be used to track our every move; are tracking our vehicle movements with the use of ANPR cameras; and if that were not enough, they are spending £12bn of our money on an NHS database that no-one wants!

I could also go on about the fact that Mr Straw decided that the British public were not entitled to know the justifications and deliberations that took place in Cabinet in the weeks leading up to the Iraq War. Instead, he used his Ministerial Veto to hide the minutes from us, even though, it was these decisions that ultimately lead to the decision to go to war and, arguably, created a situation where we made every British citizen a terrorist target.

“Talk of Britain sliding into a police state is daft scaremongering….”

The police under Labour have been given unprecedented powers. They can prevent marches or protests, take DNA even when no charges have been laid, arrest and detain without charge for up to 28 days, spy on any member of the public they so choose, (using the tools that the government argued were for protection against terrorism and major crime) and now they can quell protest by firing deadly tasers at ordinary citizens, with the issue of a Taser for every front line policeman. Even the Houses of Parliament are not sacrosanct and there have also been cases of the police listening in to private and privileged conversations between a defendant and their lawyer. I could go on, but I would be here for hours.

“….but even were it true there is a mechanism to prevent it - democratic elections. People have the power to vote out administrations which they believe are heavy-handed.”

This is quite true, New Labour have not found a method by which they could remove our democratic right to vote, although they do have the powers to know what we are saying or writing because of their unprecedented power to spy on us. However, whilst we have this democratic right, we can only exercise it once every 5 years at a time that suits the government, not the people. If Jack Straw believes that his government have acted in the best interest of the public, then he should pop along to Gordon Brown’s office and suggest two things, 1. that new legislation is introduced that allows the people of this country to insist on an immediate election where they have lost confidence in the government and 2. that Gordon Brown announce a June election, so that we can all decide on their track record now. I think it is highly unlikely that ‘Justice‘ Secretary, Jack Straw will allow us any justice.

“I hope that in the final reckoning even some of our harshest critics will concede that this Labour government has done more than any before it to extend liberties and to constrain government.”

As I have said, Jack Straw has now joined Gordon Brown in being so removed from reality and the mood of the public, that he may as well be based on Mars. No wonder this country is in so much trouble.

Hard-liner, David Blunkett, is expected to criticise the government’s continued obsession with creating a surveillance society intent on infringing the liberty and rights of British citizens in an address at the 21st annual law lecture in Essex University’s Colchester campus. Although Blunkett is expected, wrongly in my opinion, to claim that the government has got the balance between liberty and security he will voice concern over other highly contentious issues.

He will come out against the Government’s controversial plan to set up a database holding details of telephone calls and emails and its proposal to allow public bodies to share personal data with each other. He will also suggest a complete U-Turn on compulsory identity cards, although he is expected to insist that they should be mandatory for all foreign nationals. David Blunkett is also expected to urge the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw, to dilute the provisions of the Coroners and Justice Bill on data sharing between public bodies. He will warn: “It is not simply whether the intentions are benign, undoubtedly they are, but whether they are likely to be misused and above all what value their use may have.” Similarly, he is expected to criticise the misuse of the 2000 Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which has been used for example, by local councils to tackle dog fouling and the monitoring of rubbish (no, not MP’s, refuse!)

When someone that so vehemently supported the introduction of ID cards and tough anti-terror laws raises concerns about the risk to privacy and liberty, the government must sit up and take notice. Although Blunkett’s comments are measured, it is reasonable to surmise that he is genuinely concerned and in order not to embarrass the government, he has couched his comments to be received positively. In just over a week, we have had the former head of MI5 criticising this government’s intrusion into our lives and now a former, hard-line Home Secretary. When will the government realise that they have gone way to far and, when will opposition parties appreciate that they would be pushing at an open door if they agreed to review and if necessary, repeal oppressive and draconian legislation that infringes the rights of the people of this country?

I will let David Blunkett have the last few words. “The strength of our democracy is that we are able to challenge when the well-meaning, but sometimes misguided, take their own knowledge of the threats we face to be justification for protecting our mutual interest at the expense of our individual freedom. If we tolerate the intolerable, the intolerable gradually becomes the norm.”

According to a survey completed by the Hansard Society, MP’s are not taking advantage of the power of the internet and, those that do, typically use it as a method of transmitting information, not receiving it. The only thing that should surprise anyone here is the fact that this is being heralded as a new discovery. The truth is, members of parliament (from all parties) have been talking at the British public for decades, although it is more prevalent now than it was, for example, 15 years ago.

With one or two notable exceptions, the only time members of parliament engage with the public is when they want something, which is typically once every 5 years, to convince us to vote for them. Once they get their seat in parliament, the majority of them couldn’t give a toss about their constituents, all of a sudden that are taken in by the deference they are shown and the generosity of the expense accounts.

The internet is a great tool for engaging with the general public and blogs represent an excellent forum for debate, yet only a handful of MP’s have their own blogs or contribute to other ‘political’ commentary/opinion blogs. Why, do you suppose that is? I believe it is a combination of the following; they can’t be bothered, they have nothing constructive to say, they are frightened of engaging with real people that have not been briefed on what questions they can, or cannot ask, their own positions are indefensible or, they are way to busy completing their expense claims.

Some government ministers are contemptuous of so called ‘political bloggers’, take Hazel Blears for example, she waded into them last year claiming they were fuelling a “culture of cynicism about public life“.  It couldn’t be that people were daring to disagree with the government could it? In fact, her attack only demonstrated her own ignorance and ineptitude, because what she chose to forget was that behind these blogs are real people, voters, who feel that blogging is a method by which they can voice their opinion and engage with other who may or may not agree with them. One thing is certain, frustrated voters have no other way of venting, with a government intent on doing as much as they can to restric freedom of speech, marches or protests!

The truth is, members of parliament ignore the power of the internet and the influence of political bloggers at their peril. The internet is an excellent medium to find like minded individuals and although it may be still be some way off, I would not be surprised if a new political party in not founded via the internet and one that speaks for the people, rather than at them.  

Only a fool, or in this case, a party and government of fools would choose to ignore a growing momentum of disaffected voters in the vain hope that they will go away. MP’s should engage with the public, not once every 5 years, but each and every day….or risk losing their seat. If they don’t do that, then I predict that today’s political bloggers will become tomorrow’s independent MP’s, only then will the people of this country really be able to call the government to account, because it would be our equivalent of non-executive directors! So the message to ALL Members of Parliament is stop transmitting and start receiving, before it is too late!

At a time when we should all be considering tightening our belts, the government of Big Brother Britain has decided to set up yet another database to spy and record details of British citizens travel arrangements. Once again, this has is being justified on the pretext of national security. Quite apart from the fact that this government has proven itself incapable of introducing working databases on budget, the fact remains that it is entirely unnecessary. This database has nothing to do with security and everything to do with government control over its citizens. There is simply no way that this government can justify spying on 60m people in order that they can track, at most, a few thousand potential terrorists.

This is in addition to the governments intention to record every email, text message and telephone call, plus our Internet browsing habits. It is high time the British public started asking why on earth this government needs so much information on its citizens. It is estimated that the Big Brother Britain database for spying on calls and Internet traffic will cost £12bn, it is therefore, reasonable to assume that this latest database will cost at least 50% of the costs, therefore another £6bn, minimum. These two databases are equivalent to the cost of 300 new hospitals!

Once again, thus far, the opposition parties have been noticeable by their absence, they should be refusing to support this oppressive, civil liberty busting voyeurism of this Labour government. They should be promising to scrap such databases or repealing legislation that permits the collection of this data. There has been a complete lack of any justification by this government, presumably to ensure that there is as little publicity as possible whilst they try and sneak this programme through the back door.

Wake up Cameron, wake up Clegg and wake up people, this is becoming completely unacceptable, in terms of our liberty, right to privacy and of course, the excessive cost at a time when we can least afford it. We are already spied on by some 4m cameras, information on our children, their welfare, schooling, carers, health and so on is already being stored in a government database. This government is introducing a cradle to grave spying programme on its own citizens, it is time to say enough is enough. It has already been noted that we are one of the most spied on nations anywhere in the world, alongside places such as North Korea. Surely that must ring alarm bells for even the most complacent British citizen?

This latest database will store names, addresses, telephone numbers, seat reservations, travel itineraries and credit card details of travellers. The notion that if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear is total nonesense. Why? Because is presupposes that the people that have access to this information will use it for legitimate purposes. How can we be certain when this government has already allowed thousands of agencies, public and private access to our personal information that is already stored? Enough is enough, stand up and be counted people, and Mr Cameron, get off your backside and say something, either you support this destruction of our civil liberties, or you must fight against it, show some backbone, prove to the people of this country that you are not a lighweight. Say no to Big Brother Britain - RESIST!

Tomorrow at Prime Ministers Question time, the opposition parties shall seek to raise the issue of the arrest of Damian Green. In particular, they will want to know how much advance notice, if any, government ministers or senior civil servants had and why the police were allowed to search Green’s offices? In doing so, they are expected to cite the fact that leaks are necessary if government is to be held to account, provided the information is not protected by the Official Secrets Act. Further, that members of parliament are entitled to have legal privilege between them and their constituents. All very noble, but it completely misses the point, the Damian Green affair was the result, not the cause.

Instead of looking at self-interest, our elected members of parliament, in government and opposition, must look at the laws they have been passed that have allowed this type of attack on our democratic process. The truth is, the opposition parties have been lead like lambs to the slaughter by this government, who have said, if you don’t support our draconian anti-terror legislation, then we shall publicise the fact that you are soft on crime or security. Like little lambs, instead of holding the government to account, the opposition parties went to the slaughter. In other words, they didn’t do their jobs, it is all very well bleating about holding the government to account now, but what have they been doing for the past 11 years?

What is needed is a complete review of the anti-terror laws that have been introduced under this government. Opposition parties must seek clarity on how these laws are being implemented and used against the original intent when the legislation was ’sold’ to parliament. Because I am certain, that no MP expected anti-terror laws to be used to sequestrate the assets of an otherwise friendly country (Iceland), but that is precisely what happened. The police and security services have demanded and received new laws that allow them powers akin to those of a police state. To date, unlike many police states, they do not torture those arrested, but with 30,000 tasers being order, perhaps that is just a matter of time.

Eleven years ago, the police would not have had the powers that were used to arrest Damian Green. Nor would they have been able to gather telephone intercept evidence without a judges warrant. That is no longer the case.

Damian Green should be grateful that the police did not believe that he was receiving information contained under the Official Secrets Act, because then, theoretically, he could have been detained without charge for up to a month, not 9 hours. That is the problem, the police and security services have been given massive powers over the people of this country, not targeted powers for wrongdoers, but blanket powers that can be used against anyone including MP’s. Whatever this government says, the police are a tool of state, after all, the most senior policeman in the land is not elected, he is appointed by none other than the Home Secretary.
The people of this country have seen a massive erosion of their rights, freedom and liberties over the past 11 years and this event has highlighted this. Even the ‘New Labour’ supporting newspaper The Sun, has finally determined that the state has too much power over the populous.

People that claim we are moving towards a police state are branded as nutters, yet Privacy International were moved to say of the UK ”The worst ranking EU country is the United Kingdom, which again fell into the “black” category along with Russia and Singapore.” And that our “identity scheme is still planned to be the most invasive in the world, highly centralised and biometrics-driven“.

This is what I said a month ago on the issue of government control:

The people of this country have had to endure an increasing level of state interference in their everyday lives, from 4.2m CCTV cameras, to chips in rubbish bins. With proposals that include a massive Big Brother Britain database which would store information on calls, text messages, locations, emails and internet browsing habits. Airport scanners which see though clothes, identity cards which include our most private and intimate details. Our children from the age of 5, will be monitored by the state to include their most private details such as details on their mental health, sexual health or any substance abuse treatment. The list is endless, as is the number of ‘agencies’ that will have access to this information, some 700 as last count!.

I earnestly hope that the opposition parties will take the wider issues into account. In other words, how we got where we are today, how and why the state and their agents have so much power, that people can be detained for a month without charge, have their email, phone calls, text messages and internet browsing habits, routinely captured and stored, their DNA taken and stored, even where no charge has been laid etc, etc. This has all been done in the name of fighting crime or terrorism, but what a price we have had to pay. Yet the terrorist threat has not been lessened and crime is not falling. All that has transpired is the police need less evidence to make a charge and have gained more charges to target the majority with. It is an appalling state of affairs in what has become Big Brother Britain. We need to reverse this situation now and there is no better opportunity than the Damian Green affair to widen the debate. Opposition parties must insist on a public debate on the issue of all the new legislation that has been introduced at the expense of our civil liberties, right to privacy and individual freedom.

How ironic that it has taken the arrest of Damian Green, the Shadow Immigration Minister to provoke David Cameron into describing the police as “Stalinesque“. Because his party has sat on its hands whilst this Labour government has consistently removed the rights and civil liberties of every single person in this country. What is Cameron’s problem, does he think he is a cut above the rest of us, that the draconian, Big Brother Britain laws introduced to control the citizens of this country shouldn’t be used against a member of parliament? Pathetic little man, it was Cameron’s job to keep this control obsessed government in check, he failed, now one of his minister pays the price. Bloody good job if this is what it has taken to wake Cameron and his party from their self-induced slumber.

For what it is worth, I completely agree, the police action was outrageous, but what did Cameron expect? On his watch, New Labour has introduced a raft of measures and legislation designed specifically to allow the state to control, spy and monitor every one of its citizens. This includes, but is not limited to tracking our vehicle movements through ANPR or CCTV cameras; indulging in recording, monitoring and commenting on our most personal details on a health service database; or having voyeuristic access to very email, text message and call we make. Then to compund this abuse of power by making the information available to up to 800 separate agencies, including private companies. Just yesterday, Jacqui Smith ordered 10,000 Tasers to be used against the people of this country, with the stated intention of arming 30,000 front line officers and barely a murmur from Cameron’s compliant party of opposition.

The police in this country have been given unprecedented powers, akin to that of a repressive police state, not the police “service” of a first world country and yet they are asking for even more. This government has pandered to their every whim, like a lovesick teenager, not the objective supervising team they are supposed to be. It was as if government ministers were in awe and the police no longer want to detect or investigate crime, preferring to monitor everyone and wait for them to make a wrong move.

Take a look at what has happened over the past 35 years in the police service. Foot patrols became mobile patrols, mobile patrols became poorly trained ‘plastic’ policemen. The ‘plastics’ were given uniforms that have been deliberately modeled to make it difficult to determine whether it is a PCSO or a proper copper. The traditional baton was enhanced with pepper spray, which is now going to be supplemented with the life threatening Taser guns. No wonder they need to go around in cars! Could Cameron’s Conservative party not see a pattern emerging here? If he is smart enough to be proposed as the next prime minister, why was he no so bright as to see what was coming, or perhaps he thought it didn’t apply to his sort!

We are told by government ministers that crime has been falling, especially violent crime, so why do the police have a need for such violent weapons to combat a smaller threat. News that every front line officer is to be provided with a Taser is unprecedented, what has happened here, have the police officers lost their bottle? There was a time when being a police officer meant you had to have courage, now police officers routinely hide behind their computer screens, desks and ridiculous health & safety rules that inhibit policing and risk to a level akin to crossing a busy road.

God forbid that police officers should have to leave their comfortable cars or offices to a investigate crime or risk getting hurt in the line of duty. What type of police officer feels the need to have an array of weapons which include a baton, pepper spray and a deadly taser gun before he or she will go outside and meet what is a relatively law abiding public? Under this government, the police have been allowed to determine which crimes they investigate, so for example, victims of burglaries and vandelism must accept a crime number, with no investigation. With very few exceptions, everyone that I know that has had to report a crime or interface with the police have come away appalled at their lack of commitment or unwillingness to investigating crime. The fact that anyone going to a police station to report a crime is expected to deal with a civilian is indicative of where the police have gone wrong. Bottom line Cameron, is the police service needs to be hauled in, they have quite simply go too big for their boots.

Gordon Brown claimed that his would be an open government. Whilst his ministers may not like the leaking of certain documents, if it is in the public interest, they should not be using the police as a weapon of state to punish those concerned. After all, if there was no national security risk, just a possibility of a minister being embarrassed or caught out in a lie, why the need for anti-terrorist officers. The claim that no minister knew the police were going to arrest Damien Green really pushes at the fringes of credibility.

But I feel the need to point David Cameron in the right direction. The problem is when government provides such a wide definition of a law. For example, Green was arrested on arrested on “suspicion of conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office and aiding and abetting, counselling or procuring misconduct in a public office“. Now that encompasses just about everything. By the same token, this government has used similar, broad definitions to destroy many of the civil liberties and rights to privacy of the individual in this country under the guise of anti-terror laws. Cameron’s party wanting to appear tough on crime and terror legislation have been compliant to the extent that they could be accused of being complicit in the whole sorry state of affairs.

Our police service now has unprecedented powers, passed to them by a compliant government, that was intent on achieving state control. Damien Green has now become a victim of Big Brother Britain, his boss doesn’t like it and neither do we! Perhaps Cameron and co, will now realise how the public feel about the removal of our rights by opposing new legislation and offering to repeal similar, uneccessary acts. I am personally delighted that one of Cameron’s MP’s has had the opportunity to feel first hand the affects of a repressive state.

News that Jacqui Smith feels obliged to order another 10,000 Tasers at a time when the government coffers are empty has to be worrying for the British public. Whilst we know that this government doesn’t really care about how much of our money they spend, because they can just put up our taxes, the timing is very interesting and surely cannot be a coincidence.

Alistair Darling has just announced that the government finances are in a complete mess (not his words of course), in fact, if the country was a business, it would almost certainly need to call in the administrators. The economic reality of this situation has already started to trickle down, resulting in higher taxes at a time when people can least afford it ( ignore the VAT stimulus con ), the loss of peoples homes, fewer jobs etc. A public backlash is almost inevitable, as soon as those that still insist on hero worshipping New Labour for ’shafting the rich’ realise that they too must pay a price. A very high one at that.

You might think that in a developed country, government would seek to reassure people and provide genuine support or advice at a time of national crisis. But there are two systemic problems preventing this. The first is this government has wasted so much of our money on social engineering projects and Big Brother Britain spying exercises, that there is nothing left. In fact it is worse than that, we have a massive public debt, over £1 trillion. So financial support is not a viable option, hence the reason this government introduced a ‘fiscal stimulus’ based on Alice in Wonderland economics, purchase taxes. If New Labour were serious about a fiscal stimulus package, they would have offered a reduction in direct taxation, which would at least be tangible.

The second issue is that this government has never engaged with the public. Instead they have bribed their own voters with tax credits and the like, whilst bullying all other sections of the community including business to pay for them. The Pre-Budget Report, was supposed to demonstrate that New Labour cares, but anyone with any nous will know that it is an elaborate con, all presentation and no substance….classic New Labour smoke and mirrors. The bottom line is we should always be wary of a government that wants to be your best mate when they have been shafting you for the past 11 years. In other words, this government only knows how to preach, bully, con and bribe. The government also knows that eventually, they will get caught out and that day is looming ever closer, so they must now return to type. Bring forward Big Brother Britain and force.

So what can we expect? Unlike 1984, we will not witness the police controlling protesters armed with batons and shields, instead, in Big Brother Britain, we shall have to contemplate our police force using Tasers against its own citizens. This is in spite of the fact that Tasers are claimed to have lead to the death of up to 300 people in America. They say timing is everything. Why else would Jacqui Smith place such a massive order for Tasers? It appears to me that they are anticipating some form of backlash and they intend to suppress it with deadly, uncompromising force. This will be no surprise to those that have seen the UK moving steadily move towards a police state, but for the rest and that will be the majority, it is likely to become something of a shock, no pun intended!

Now, whilst I fully accept that this will not make one jot of difference to the current Labour government it is nonetheless, symbolic given it demonstrates that the government will have an uphill struggle to introduce identity cards. Scottish MSP’s do not believe ID cards will increase security or deter crime and quite frankly, nor do I. I don’t find myself agreeing with many Scottish MP’s at the moment, but I am more than happy to applaud their stance on this particular issue.

The reality is, identity cards are a genuine, tangible and unacceptable threat to the civil liberties and right to privacy of British citizens. No government minister has told the people of this country howID cards will deter crime and reduce the risk of terrorism, only that they will. That is not the way to sell a programme like this. However, as we all know, this government does not believe in asking, only telling, so they intend to introduce these cards come what may, simply because they are arrogant enough to believe that government knows best. Can anyone watch Jacqui Smith bumbling and stuttering away and say, with any conviction, that they feel safer with her at the helm? I think not, she is out of her depth, ill-informed and an appalling communicator.

Richard Baker a Labour MSP, no I hadn’t heard of him either, said “There’s nothing extreme or unusual in the introduction of ID cards and the kind of data which will be on them.” There is nothing clever in attempting to mislead the public. This government have already made clear that they intend to include a mass of data on ID cards, from bio-metrics, though to health and financial details. These little cards will end up being our own ‘police tags’. It has nothing to do with deterring crime and combating terrorism and everything to do with government attempts at controlling the people of this country. They can sod off!

Already, in what has become an all consuming quest to control and punish the people of this country, this government has indicated the “penalties” that will be applied if people fail to provide the government with updated details for their ID cards. Even though ID cards haven’t been launched for the masses yet, we are bombarded with our likely punishment for non-compliance. We are being treated like naughty schoolchildren, not adults capable of making decisions and running our own lives. Government ministers say that the penalties are not there to raise revenue and for once I believe them, instead, they are there to punish those that would dare to resist the will of our masters in government. In other words, by introducing fines and making non-compliance a criminal offence, they are seeking to control the will of the people of this country through fear, many people will doubtless be able to draw a parallel with a police state.

Phil Booth, national coordinator of NO2ID sums it up very well, “There is some very nasty stuff buried in the fine print of this consultation document. Basically, you have to tell them everything they want to know about you under threat - and pay for the privilege.”

Any party in power that would seek to introduce a programme against the will of the public is not fit for government. The bottom line is terrorists and criminals will always find a way around ID cards, just as they have been able to forge passports, drivers licenses and any other identity document you care to mention. The government know this, therefore, we should all be asking ourselves, what is the real game plan? This particular issue is not about party politics, it is about individual freedom, the rights of people in this country to not just be free, but to feel free.

Through its policies and inept handling of the economy, this government has removed our financial freedom. With the introduction of a raft of so called ‘anti-terror’ laws, they have already removed many of our civil liberties and rights to privacy. They now seek to go even further. ID cards, NHS Database, ContactPoint, DNA database to name but a few. It is time for us all to not only call a halt to all this, but to insist that any future government and MP’s undertake to repeal many of these destructive, draconian, obtrusive and unreasonable laws. If the main opposition parties refuse to take up the mantle, then perhaps there is a very good case for the public to support and vote for independent MP’s rather than those affiliated with a particular political party. In fact, I would very much like to see more independent MP’s put themselves forward with a local manifesto. Perhaps the bloggers should unite!

News that the Data Communication Bill has been shelved will be welcomed by all those that have campaigned against it. Needless to say, the government claim that it has nothing to do with those that are against this Big Brother Britain bill and everything to do with the fact that MP’s need to concentrate on the economy.

I suspect it has far more to do with the fact that the government needs a controversial bill like a hole in the head, the estimated cost of £12bn is going to be criticised in the current climate and they want to clear the decks for an early election to take advantage of Labour’s poll bounce. Whatever the case, it is unlikely that any attempt will be made to reintroduce the bill until 2011 and hopefully, by that time, New Labour will be history. Predictably, the police are complaining that it will hinder their efforts to fight crime and terrorism, well perhaps if they got off their backsides and did what they were paid to do, there would not be a need to spy on 65m people.

The police in this country have more powers than virtually any other country in the world and yet they still whine. They also have 167,000 police officers, but I have to confess, I haven’t seen one in the last 2 weeks, plenty of community support officers, but no real coppers, no wonder they want to spy on us all. This bill should actually be scrapped and its predecessor, which provides many of the same rights, save a legal requirement that service providers must keep the information for 2 years, should be repealed. Only then can we be certain that state sponsored voyeurism is being rolled back.

I don’t want to get into a debate as to the rights and wrongs of whether people should agree to donate their organs, although I am willing to state, for the record, that I support the organ donor programme. What concerns me is when government, in spite of advice to the contrary, determines that it knows best.

The UK Organ Donation Taskforce have stated that they do not believe that ‘presumed consent’ would boost organ donation rates. In fact chair of the taskforce, Elisabeth Buggins said: “We found from recipient families and donor families that the concept of gift was very important to them and presumed consent would undermine that concept.” This was not what the government wanted to hear and Alan Johnson was said to be disappointed by their findings, Gordon Brown was a little more forthright. He has threatened, that if the current recruitment campaign is not successful, he would not rule our a change of the law to provide for presumed consent.

Just who the hell does Gordon Brown think he is? He has no right to determine that he knows better than 65m people. For some, the desecration of the body of a loved one would only add to the suffering and for others, they may see organ donation as a positive consequence of a tragic circumstance. Either way, the choice cannot be the governments, they do not own us, nor do they own our bodies. This is yet another example of Big Brother Britain, another way in which the state tells us who is in charge and how little control we have over our own lives.

As we all know, this government cannot be trusted to keep its word, whatever assurances they may provide in public regarding presumed consent, we just know the small print will provide them with the real power. For example, the government may and probably will state that relatives must be able to provide demonstrable proof that a loved one did not want their organs to be donated, otherwise presumed consent would apply. If they don’t do this, then there is a very real possibility that the government will have to defend thousands of legal actions from relatives that are not willing to see the bodies of their loved ones desecrated on the whim of a doctor.

I do not believe the answer lies with legislation. Instead, the poor organ donor rates are as a direct consequence of poor advertising and recruitment campaigns. For example, press and TV advertising, whilst expensive, does not have a call to action, it only imparts information. What is needed is a programme that creates debate, for example but not exclusively, educating children at school, not in a negative way, but in a positive, uplifting manner, because this would encourage children to discuss the issue with their parents and then families can determine how they feel about this emotive issue.

Once governments start to legislate on such emotional issues, there will be a backlash, the negative connotations surrounding of organ donor-ship will come to the fore, people will resist and the programme will fail miserably. I can tell you for nothing, that if the government bring in presumed consent, then I will personally opt out, because I will not be dictated to by a government that is so willing to disregard my right to choose. This is the thin edge of the wedge, it really is, what is to stop the government to determine that we must all, for example give blood? Giving blood is an excellent and commendable contribution made by individuals but it is voluntary, there is also a shortage of blood, what is to stop the government from introducing legislation requiring everyone to donate blood, for example, twice a year? Answer, nothing.

As I stated at the outset, this has nothing to do with whether or not organ donation is a good or a bad thing, it is about our right to choose. No government should introduce legislation that removes that fundamental right. This government has consistently driven through legislation that has eroded, removed or virtually destroyed our civil liberties, our freedoms and our right to privacy and they have been allowed to do so, by an incapable opposition party and complacent people. Bouyed by this, the government now threatens to demonstrate how we have all sleep walked into Big Brother Britain, by introducing legislation that will confirm, that not only does the government control everything we do, say, think and write in life, they now control our bodies after death.