Big Step taken towards police state: Data retention

[Sean-Bhean bhoct]

You contradict yourself... On one hand you say the EU saved us from ourselves and then you go on to tell us that other EU states have much more CCTV retention and an addition of DNA records. Talk about double standards 2 or more for 1, who is the blind one?

Clearly you are. How did I contradict myself? I said that the EU COMMISSION brought Ireland to the ECJ re our data retention laws which were contrary to the EU directive.

I then went on to say that European States, SOME OF WHICH ARE NOT IN THE EU (I meant to also include common law states but my bad) have much harsher domestic legislation that infringes civil rights to a much greater extent than Irish law. This domestic legislation has absolutely nothing to do with the EU or EU directives. I did not contradict myself. I was simply trying to demonstrate that ireland is far from the sort of police state that some posters are portraying.

It is you who have demonstrated a lack of understanding of the topic. Domestic law in justice and home affairs are completely separate to EU directives in that area - the EU, as it stands, doesn't have the same power to legislate for justice and home affairs as it does economic affairs.

[Sean-Bhean bhoct]

Really? So you are happy for all your comms records to be kept for 2 years? I think that you are missing the central argument.

Regards...jmcc

I wasn't missing the central argument at all. Where did I say I was happy with my data being kept for 2 years?

I was simply attempting to provide some objective fact to the debate because some posters were getting completely carried away. Most of them were, and still are, very hazy on the details and clearly showed a lack of understanding of the subject area.

[Sean-Bhean bhoct]

I simply don't think the directive should exist at all. We can deal with our own corrupt halfwit Government by voting them out. However, I think the Commission and the EP is grossly overstepping its role by implementing directives that infringe on civil rights like that.

I am quite strongly in favour of the EU, I am totally opposed to this kind of spying on citizens though.

As far as I am concerned both FF and the Commission are undermining freedom of speech by doing this. I don't really care who did it first. They're both fully culpable.

Perhaps its time that we roll out some proper personal privacy laws, preferably Europe-wide.

While I am in favour of most things about the EU, I do think that there is a gaping democratic deficit and it needs to be addressed in a much more serious way than by the Lisbon Treaty.

Just because I critise something does not mean that I'm immediately a raving Euro-sceptic. I simply don't like this aspect of the EU and I want something done about it. Until then, I don't necessarily think I want to grant the organisation any more control over my affairs.

As for FF, I will be doing my utmost to ensure that they are booted out of office for a whole variety of reasons. Roll-on election 2009!

I agree with you for the most part. I don't like the idea of it either. It massively infringes, inter alia, the right to privacy. However, it was precisely because of this type of legislation that Joe O' Reilly was convicted so you can understand the need for it.

Where I ardently disagree with you relates to somehow implicating FF in this. It was McDowell who legislated for this particular law on data retention. To say the 'government' would be more accurate and objective.

The fact of the matter is that FG and Lab both support the EU gaining power in justice and home affairs, commonly known as the third pillar. As far as privacy is concerned, didn't the government publish a Privacy Bill in 2006? Dermot Aherne has mentioned it on several occasions in relation to the Surveillance Act and intends to bring it before the house soon.

You should have a cursory glance over the Law Reform Commissions 1998 report on privacy and you'll understand how difficult it is to legislate in this area since the concept of privacy is, in itself, rapidly evolving. Also, you'll find that most countries haven't been able to adequately protect it through legislation.

All I'm saying is try not to let your subjectivity and bias against FF rub off on your perception of the law in this area. You are definitely wrong to attribute the problems in this area to FF. You can vote against them all you want in 2012 but you'd be misguided to use this as one of the reasons for doing so. You're blatantly clutching at straws here to be honest!

[Gimpanzee]

The bulk of our data protection legislation is in place because of EU commitments. We have a Data Commissioners office because of an EU directive. Ireland has had to been poked. prodded and threatened with fines for not enacting proper data protection legislation in the past decade.

However, it is fair to say that while pre-2003 the emphasis was far more on data protection than on surveillance, that changed in the efforts to get a handle on the terrorist threat. But anyone who does look at the history of data protection would see that on balance the EU has been in the privacy rather than the surveillance corner. 'Course that doesn't suit the usual cliched arguments

[jmcc]

I wasn't missing the central argument at all. Where did I say I was happy with my data being kept for 2 years?

Well it might have been this:

However, the EU commission took Ireland to the ECJ arguing that 3 years was far too long to keep such personal information. And in March of this year the ECJ ruled in favour of the Commission and stated that the Irish law was to be amended with 2 years being the maximum time for data retention.

So, if anything, the EU saved us from ourselves.

Your EU cheerleading gave the impression that you were happy that the vegetables in Brussels saved us poor stupid Paddies from ourselves.

Most of them were, and still are, very hazy on the details and clearly showed a lack of understanding of the subject area.

And if I was to say that the Irish Times and many other commentators on the subject area (data retention, supercrunching and data surveillance) haven't much of an understanding of the subject area, would you agree? Or do you still think that you can rely on those who don't understand the subject area to explain just how such data is used?

Regards...jmcc