back to article UK's planned Espionage Act will crack down on Snowden-style Brit whistleblowers, suspected backdoored gear (cough, Huawei)

UK Home Secretary Sajid Javid has announced an Espionage Bill, charging ahead with new laws intended to criminalise any British copycats of Edward Snowden – and allowing a future crackdown on Huawei. The bill, said Javid, "will bring together new and modernised powers, giving our security services the legal authority they need …

  1. Christoph

    "new treason laws, which he said would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain" by acting against the political interests of the current government.

    "throwing out any jurors who might return the wrong verdict by sympathising with the accused." - see above. And of course the Clive Ponting case where the judge told the jury that the "public interest" means the personal political interest of the current bunch of crooks running the government.

    1. Ben Tasker Silver badge

      Yes, there's something distinctly scary about the idea that the current shower could get to redefine Treason.

      Half of them are incompetent so will probably bungle it and make the definition overly broad, whilst the other half appear to be more towards the fascist end of the scale, so will also make it overly broad.

      And then they get the power to kick out "overly-sympathetic" jurors...

      1. This post has been deleted by its author

    2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      I thought this is why they kept voting slips for anyone who voted for extremist parties ( like the lib-dems?) They used to use it to 'correct' jury selection in the 60/70s of any communists

      1. Sir Runcible Spoon

        Voting is anonymous in the UK.

        Unless there was 100% vote for one particular party at the polling station you use, there is no means to identify who ticked what on their ballot paper.

        1. Naich

          It's not anonymous - your ballot paper has a serial number on it which is linked to the register. They are only linked in cases of suspected fraud and with a court order.

          1. Norman Nescio

            Parliamentary vote-tracing in the UK

            More details in this The Guardian "Notes and Queries" item here:

            The Guardian - Notes and Queries: What happens to the voting slips used in British elections after they have been counted?

            Votes can be traced by matching the numbered ballot paper to its similarly numbered counterfoil; the numbered counterfoil also bears the voter's registration number from the electoral register which is hand-written by the Polling Clerk when the ballot paper is issued. As all the ballot papers for each candidate - including fringe candidates such as Sinn Fein, communists, fascists, nationalists, etc. - are bundled together, anyone having access to those documents can speedily trace the name and address of every voter for such candidates if they wish.

            The issue is not whether or not the stories are false, but the system of numbering ballot papers in parliamentary elections allows people to give credence to such stories whether they are true or not. It is important that elections are seen to be anonymous, and anything that disrupts that appearance is unfortunate.

          2. Sir Runcible Spoon

            I stand corrected - I've never witnessed the polling station staff recording the serial number against my name on the register. I will be keeping an eye out for such activity in the upcoming elections.

        2. Stork Silver badge

          I think you are wrong. At least when I voted at local elections in Liverpool in the 90es, the ballot papers were numbered and I seem to remember the officials noting who on the list got it. But I could remember wrong

    3. Kicker of Metaphorical Cats

      It 'should be' about the facts

      Jurors can be sympathetic, empathetic, and disinterested. If you are the accused then sympathetic is a great juror. Empathetic is a mixed bag since the juror may reflect on what you could have done to prevent yourself from getting in the spot you are in now so I am guessing nobody wants them around. The disinterested will side with whomever gets them home quickest. The move to strike those that are sympathetic is understandable from the position of prosecution but hardly practical given they will never get it right and also disenfranchises those that plan on being impartial regardless of how they appear.

      If there was a way to only include those that would deal with the facts then I would be on-board for that. But life is not fair so why should a trial be?

      1. Threlkeld

        Re: It 'should be' about the facts

        What's in a word?

        'Disinterested' means 'not having a personal interest'. Thus, probably the ideal juror. He has 'no dog in that fight' and will be objective.

        'Uninterested' means 'totally unengaged, bored, wanting to go home. Possibly the very worst sort of juror.

    4. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      If this quote in the article is verbatim

      '..He also called for new treason laws, which he said would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain, whether at home or abroad.'

      Then rejoice!, we've nothing to worry about at there's no such legal beastie called Britain to betray.

      If, however, he actually meant the UK, but didn't want to tip his hand, then the Scottish and Welsh nationalists better start watching their backs again, or, should that be start seriously watching their backs again as I think it's no great secret that they've always been 'spook ridden'.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Caveat Elector (*)

        "If, however, he actually meant the UK, "

        Or, post Lisbon Treaty, the EU. Which is why I voted Leave - not because I am racist, not because I have a problem with "foreigners" in what is currently the UK, but because next year will see the realisation of a dream started by a certain Austrian back in 1939.

        Even if you believe the current European leaders really have their citizens' best interests at heart (in which case I refer you to the Yellowjackets in Paris), we are all familiar with the way what the customer requests and what Marketing promises doesn't always bear much resemblance to what lands on your doorstep - and if the treatment handed out to the Gillets Jaune aren't enough of a warning sign, look at the rising number of extremist groups crawling out of their cess pits in central Europe...

        (*) Voter Beware - and yes, I know it's not real Latin, thank you.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Caveat Elector (*)

          Well that is interesting; one of the reasons I want to stay in the EU is because I consider the EU would look after British citizens' interests more strongly than UK governments would.

        2. Teiwaz

          Re: Caveat Elector (*)

          Mistreatment of citizens by individual nation states is exactly why we need a greater European body to hold them in check.

          If you are unhappy with Europe being led by unelected bureaucrats, blame your applicable national government, who wanted a federal europe but also were unwilling to hand it over to their people in the form of the European Parliament.

          The oozing sores of extremism are not symptoms of a rotten European Union but of the decomposition of the individual nation states within and out.

          I always regarded Marketings job as to try to convince people in the general area to buy something they don't need, When a customer actually comes asking, it's Sales that actually tries to meet their need with what's in stock.

          Problem is the voters don't know what they want, nor what's good merchandise and what's septic poison and will often buy something garish and on the cusp of going rotten or the same as last time unable to tell dull and tasteless from foul.

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Predicted three decades ago.

      "throwing out any jurors who might return the wrong verdict by sympathising with the accused."

      No matter how sophisticated, a system of control that removes the rights covertly of an individual ultimately will not scale beyond a certain point.

      No matter how many buckets you have, repeatedly drilling holes in the keel will eventually sink the boat.

      I'm afraid this Orwellian move is the last panic of a dying policy of defeating an enemy by means of a chess game. You cannot eliminate an ideology by paying the women to breed adherents.

      Not long now.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Predicted three decades ago.

        Yes sink. But at what point? It can go a long way and take a lot with it in the process.

    6. Voidstorm
      Joke

      Ze future Geshtapo government zanks you very much, Herr Javid.

      Now, verr is ze Madonna viz ze Big Boobies?

    7. Nick Kew
      Facepalm

      "throwing out any jurors who might return the wrong verdict by sympathising with the accused."

      Yeah, we learned our lesson there in Iraq, where we assumed the UN jury headed by Hans Blix would reach the right verdict, and had to throw them out very publicly at the eleventh hour of the trial when it was evident they were heading for the wrong verdict.

      1. Andy The Hat Silver badge

        "throwing out any jurors who might return the wrong verdict by sympathising with the accused."

        Perhaps this implementation of the system will be based on 'observation of best practice' - perhaps he's been watching documentaries on how strong and effective the Klingon and Romulan jury systems are against naughty space travellers?

        Democracy in this country is slipping away so quickly yet both ordinary MPs and the people seem totally myopic about it.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          The situation hasn't actually changed that much, it's just that all of a sudden they've decided to redecorate the (previously) invisible walls in blood red.

        2. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

          A Simple Test of Corrupt and Perverse States of Non-Representation

          Democracy in this country is slipping away so quickly yet both ordinary MPs and the people seem totally myopic about it. ..... Andy The Hat

          Clearly advising ordinary MPs and the people about it, Andy The Hat, almost immediately has the people able and enabled to shame and blame MPs with whistleblowing presentations of the evidence of their inactions in the face of such knowledge and purloined intelligence resulting in their failure to address and engage Rapid Rabid Emerging Realisations with Greater Plans than of Late for the Future.

          Or do Parliaments Expect A.N.Others to Lead with Democracy and they be just paid to Temporarily Play Guardian Nurse of Stellar Assets which is an Enigmatic Sinecure of a Post Originally Designed to Engage with Intellect and Information to make Novel Practical Use of Freely Available Viable ImaginaNation?

          One simply just has to ask Parliamentary type leaderships some of those awkward questions to know what is, or is not, in their heads.

  2. cbars

    if we're doing literally anything

    to 'look good' in another countries eyes.... we're hardly worth talking about, let alone bring proud of. America is not the bastion of virtue, there isn't one. What a pathetic cry for help from the home sec; Brexit, disillusion and fear have written a terrible chapter of our history.

    1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: if we're doing literally anything

      "What a pathetic cry for help from the home sec"

      Nothing to do with cries for help. He's just had the standard brainwashing that the Home Office gives new Home Secs. This is what the Home Office has wanted for a long time. The restraining influence for the last few decades has been the oversight of European courts. It looks as if we're en route to getting rid of that.

  3. Dedobot

    It wasn't "communist state" when they manufactured your shits for 1/10 of the price ?! Or may be I just missed last week Chinese communist revolution news ?

  4. Queeg
    Black Helicopters

    I wonder if..

    High Chancellor Javid drinks warm milk at bed time?

    1. Fred Dibnah

      Re: I wonder if..

      He might enjoy a milkshake.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: I wonder if..

        are, perchance, referring to a TERRORIST act of throwing a milkshake at anyone in particular, eh, eh?! The choppers are already in the air, so you'd better delete your TERRORIST insinuation (for the sake of democracy, and all that)

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: a TERRORIST act of throwing a milkshake

          It's not "throwing a milkshake" - it's a trial of the new uber-eats ballistic delivery service. :-)

          1. PapaD

            Re: a TERRORIST act of throwing a milkshake

            Considering a lot of our elected officials are clearly showing signs of calcium deficiency (first symptom on the list is: Mental confusion, irritability, depression, and anxiety.) then it seems like the milkshake incident could be classed as performing our civil duty in ensuring the health and wellbeing of those who are supposed to steer this nation.

            Clearly their inability to manage anything remotely resembling effective governance is a sign of their mental confusion from lack of calcium. Providing high calcium milk based refreshment should be considered the act of a Hero in these trying times. Rapid disbersement of such refreshment can only be lauded as a strong motivation to provide emergency medical assistance.

  5. NoneSuch Silver badge
    Coffee/keyboard

    "After the United States, we are probably the largest contributor to the international system of defence and intelligence that keeps the world safe,"

    Fixed it for you.

    "After the United States, we are probably the largest contributor to the international system of defence and intelligence that keeps politicians safe,"

  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So this would enable us to ban imports from the US for reasons of national security...

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      If it was necessary in our support of Huawei, remember we have always been at war with eurasia, eastasia are our friends

  7. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "He also called for new treason laws, which he said would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain"

    They're coming for you, Remain voters ...

    I bet some Daily Express readers cremed their kecks on reading this news.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: "He also called for new treason laws, ...would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain"

      My first thoughts were, unless they catch the Brexit nutters like Farage and friends who have done much to betray Britain and its image and reputation, then the rewrite isn't worth the paper...

    2. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

      Re: "people who "betray" Britain"

      Is publishing MP's expenses treason or extremist content?

      1. Rich 11 Silver badge

        Re: "people who "betray" Britain"

        Is publishing MP's expenses treason or extremist content?

        Dunno, but it'd probably get you 25 years banged up in a duckhouse floating on a moat.

        1. Matthew Taylor

          Re: "people who "betray" Britain"

          Incitement.

    3. Christoph

      "He also called for new treason laws, which he said would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain"

      Sod the Express, the Daily Heil will love this, since they decide who to denounce as traitors - such as judges who decide according to the law rather than according to the Heil's prejudices.

  8. chivo243 Silver badge
    Go

    Official Secrets Acts?!

    Wait, aren't there two rules about the Official Secrets Acts? I have the feeling that reading about it here violates both rules.

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: Official Secrets Acts?!

      I think you are okay reading about it, just don't tell any one you've do so...

    2. Christoph

      Re: Official Secrets Acts?!

      Just don't ever violate Section Three of the Official Secrets Act (which of course you won't know about unless you've signed it (or read Charlie Stross' Laundry series))

    3. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

      Re: Official Secrets Acts?!

      Wait, aren't there two rules about the Official Secrets Acts? I have the feeling that reading about it here violates both rules. ..... chivo243

      Surely, chivo243, if one hasn't signed to acknowledge understanding and wilful compliance with terms of the Act, one cannot be prosecuted for breaking it?

      Ergo best to steer clear of it if working with information and intelligence, which always reveals secrets eventually and inevitably, for then can your knowledge be cynically and perversely used against you?

      1. Voidstorm
        Joke

        Re: Official Secrets Acts?!

        Ignorance is no excuse <read this in a Judge Dredd accent for best effect>

        And

        The innocent have nothiing to fear

        Caveat

        Nobody is innocent until "they" decide they are.

        <Translate "they" into whatever quango came up with "the next thoughtcrime">

        ;)

  9. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    Obviously looking forward to not having European courts to stand over him. Brexit gets rid of the ECJ (at least, they hope so) and ECHR will follow. This is long term HO police coming to fruition.

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge

      No doubt the anti-ECHR rhetoric will invoke the spirit of Churchill standing up to foreign oppression, while at the same time carefully skirting around the fact that Churchill was the primary instigator of the Convention and Court.

    2. MrXavia
      Alien

      Anyone who wants to get rid of the ECHR is a traitor to humanity, and is probably a lizard person

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        That's the Home Office for you. People can go into it as quite reasonable human beings, or at least, quite reasonable facsimiles of such, and emerge as Home Secretaries. They remain Home Secs even when they go elsewhere like, say, No. 10.

        1. Chris Parsons Bronze badge

          Nope, can't think of any that were reasonable upon entry.

          1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Actually they didn't manage to get at John Reid, he who described them as "not fit for purpose".

    3. phuzz Silver badge

      "Brexit gets rid of the ECJ"

      It doesn't, and removing the UK from it would be about as easy from within the EU as without.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    people who "betray" Britain

    hello, democracy?

    ...

    is that a knock on my digital door for voicing "extremist views", are we not there yet?

    ...

    not there yet. But close, getting closer. You can't go to the countries they consider extremist, you can't download, view, let alone "share" material they consider extremist, you can't voice your views they consider extremist, (and, horror, horror, you can't even wank in private, cause extremist). And certainly, no whistle-blowing, because TRAITORS! TRAITORS! TRAITORS!

    1. Voidstorm
      Black Helicopters

      Re: people who "betray" Britain

      The true problem with this sort of "fudgislation" [that word reasonable and its ilk, etc] is the uses to which it may be put not simply by the encumbents [who are bad enough] but by an unanticipated future regime.

      After all, the people only get input about who forms the government ONCE per five years, these days.

      And, of course, talking about impeaching a legitimate government could be construed as ... yes, you guessed it... treason, which is defined as "whatever we say it is".

      This sort of broadbrush lawmakiing is the worst kind, even if you trust the idiots that passed it in the first place...

  11. smudge
    Black Helicopters

    An interesting test...

    ... would be how much of the proposed Bill would be legal if the UK remained a member of the EU. Call me cynical, but I'd bet that some of it wouldn't be.

    I am fearful for the future.

    1. Roland6 Silver badge

      Re: An interesting test...

      > how much of the proposed Bill would be legal if the UK remained a member of the EU.

      Probably just the title page...

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: An interesting test...

      Smudge, you should be more worried about how this falls in with the way that the European Union treats anyone daring to question them - it's hard to have proper negotiations when one party spends three quarters of the time allowed refusing to talk at all, and the other quarter sitting at the table with the fingers in their ears chanting "don't care what you say, we're gonna destroy you".

      Don't forget that, even though 52% of the country voted Leave, our elected "representatives" seem to be able to ignore inconvenient votes when it suits them.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: An interesting test...

        Don't forget that, even though only 52% of the country voted Leave, our elected "representatives" seem to be able to ignore inconvenient votes claim it's the whole country when it suits them

        They also keep telling us that they "promised" Brexit when about half of us don't consider it a promise but a threat.

        1. Norman Nescio

          Re: An interesting test...

          It was, in fact, 51.89%1 of the eligible electorate2 who expressed a preference; or a full 37.44%3 of those eligible to vote. Not 52% of the country. In pure population terms, it was about 26.54%4, but some people were too young to vote in the referendum as they were under 18, and others ineligible because they were foreigners such as those with permanent leave to remain or EU nationals taking advantage of freedom of movement rules within the EU; and still more ineligible by virtue of the fact they were British, but had been absent (non-resident) from the UK for more than 15 years - possibly taking advantage of freedom of movement rules letting them live in another EU country5. The eligibility rules were complicated e.g. Irish citizens resident in the UK could vote, as could citizens of Malta and Cyprus, as those two countries are members of the Commonwealth, but other EU nationals could not.

          (1) 17,410,742 - according to Wikipedia

          (2) 46,500,001 - according to Wikipedia

          (3) 17,410,742 x 100 / 46,500,001 = 37.44%

          (4) The mid-year UK Population in 2016 according to the ONS was roughly 65.6 million (Time-series tabular form available here). 17,410,742 x 100 / 65,600,000 = 26.54%

          (5)Wikipedia: Eligibility to Vote and Fullfact.org: Who can vote in the EU referendum?

          1. Voidstorm
            Mushroom

            Re: An interesting test...

            Or, to put docs data another way :

            38% of the electorate voted "Leave"

            36% of the electorate voted "Remain"

            28% of the electorate voted "Fucked if I know"

            Is it truly a suprise to anyone that a consensus can't be reached, either in public or in parliament?

            The tories ran with the part of the vote that suited their agenda.

            To call it a majority when 64% of the electorate DID NOT CHOOSE that action is, frankly, offensive.

            and the decision to run with a non-binding vote from less than half the population is continuing to bite us all in the ass...

  12. Dan 55 Silver badge
    Alert

    One more step down the road we go

    Step by stupid fucking step.

    But it can't happen here...

  13. Chris G Silver badge

    Weasel

    I wouldn't trust this man as far as I could throw him.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Weasel

      Now that's a test I'd pay to see, especially if it were conducted in an exciting arena of geography, such as having cliff edges nearby.

      1. Christoph

        Re: Weasel

        A vertical cliff face. And a Trebuchet.

      2. stiine Silver badge

        Re: Weasel

        Or a quarry. According to Dr. Who, you Brit's have loads of them.

  14. martinusher Silver badge

    So we're OK with actual backdoored gear?

    (cough, Cisco?)

  15. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Unhappy

    "would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain, whether at home or abroad."

    Let's start with Dominic Cummins shall we?

    I'd say his feeding of targeted lies to the gullible banjos that went out to vote Leave was a betrayal of democracy in the UK.

    Otherwise, just another loyal sock puppet following the script of his data fetishist masters.

    The price of freedom is eternal vigilance against the UK Designated Centre for Evil (AKA The Home Office).

    1. Nick Kew

      Re: "would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain, whether at home or abroad."

      Anyone can bet against the UK. George Soros famously made gazillions doing it in 1992.

      But what if your hedge fund bets against UK while you are a member of parliament and pulling the prime minister's strings? Insider trading against the UK sounds to me like treason.

      1. Rich 11 Silver badge

        Re: "would be aimed at people who "betray" Britain, whether at home or abroad."

        Are you by any chance thinking of our good friend Jacob?

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Time for a D notice

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      I believe it's done as a rap lyric these days.

      Time 4 Da Notice!

  17. Muscleguy Silver badge

    I wonder what the position of things like being an activist for Scottish Independence will be like under it. Be interesting to see its provisions under Scots law since Sedition was repealed in Scotland by the Scottish parliament in advance of IndyRef1, just in case. In times past we would have been prosecuted for it.

    I'm also a member of Scottish CND which wants the Trident missile system stopped, or at least removed from Scotland and the Navy doesn't think it has anywhere else to put it (it conducted a scoping study in case we voted Yes in 2014 which concluded that). Again, sedition in former times.

    Hi, boys and girls at GCSB, having a good evening are you? Greetings from deep in the Yes City. Saor Alba.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      re. Scottish Independence

      that would be, let me see... uhm... yes, I've got it, there: "undermining the integrity of the State, its international security and nuclear deterrent capability". Sounds like high treason allright, wouldn't you say, old chap? And they even dare try to pretend it's within some "democratic processes"!. How pathetic! I always said we should have been fair, but FIRM with these locals up north. Low fly a couple of tornados over their "parliament" or send a punitive expedition up there...

  18. Teiwaz

    allowing a future crackdown on Huawei

    I'm sure it has the Chinese shaking in their boots.

    Another step toward 'The Bed Sitting Room'

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    GOd i hate what this country has become under the tories it's a tragedy

    1. David M

      Not just the Tories. David Blunkett and Jacqui Smith were nearly as bad, from what I remember.

  20. Martin-73
    Coat

    Simple fact

    Often said, often dismissed as overly simplistic, but it doesn't make it any less true: This shower of bastards work for US, not the other way round. Screw them and their ridiculous policies.

    Mine's the one with the strawberry milkshake in the pocket

    1. Kane Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: Simple fact

      "Mine's the one with the strawberry milkshake in the pocket"

      Banana and Salted Caramel, I think you'll find.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Simple fact

      This shower of bastards work for the US

      FTFY

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Big Brother

    Who really rules the World?

    An offence is only committed if the defendant “knew or had reasonable grounds to believe his or her conduct was capable of benefitting a foreign power and intended or was reckless as to whether his or her conduct would prejudice the safety or interests of the state

    The F^H^Hk you say, what I want to know is why you people aren't in jail? So now, we can all drop the pretense we don't live in a police state. Oh, never mind look over here “Celebrity F^H^Hk Island” is on :]

  22. streaky
    FAIL

    Backdoors..

    Uhm..

    suspected backdoored gear (cough, Huawei)

    Except Huawei isn't suspected of being backdoored by the UK intelligence agencies who are a) quite good at this and b) have been all the way up one leg and all the way down the other.

    If we're going to do this can we at least hold all the companies who manufacture networking gear to the same standard?

  23. Chozo
    Coat

    Are there any countries that accept UK citizens seeking asylum ?

    1. rg287 Silver badge

      Are there any countries that accept UK citizens seeking asylum ?

      I believe the Islamic State welcomes volunteers...?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        SORRY! Visits to Islamic State are NOT ALLOWED (and, surely, punishable upon return by refusing to let you back in. If you do return in one, animated piece).

    2. Swarthy Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Lucky You

      You still have most of Europe you can bugger off to, and all of the Commonwealth countries. Us poor USAians are pretty well stuck with our shower, who are doing the same things; and our "government" has shat on the rest of the world from such a great height that us citizens are all tarred (well, it is a dark, tar-like substance) with the same brush, and no-one wants us.

      Or is that just another lie perpetuated by our so-called leaders, to keep the sheep in line?

  24. MrTuK

    1984 !

    Jokes aside people, this is so scary and it make me angry cos if the politicians won't deliver BREXIT as was mandated by the referendum by 51% of the vote then we are going down a very bad direction because the politicians really don't believe that they work for us and that if they create new laws then we will not be able to fight them when we eventually get back our backbone because our crimes will not be trying to make the country a free thinking state again but called Treason !

    1. Rich 11 Silver badge

      Re: 1984 !

      BREXIT as was mandated by the referendum

      Exactly which form of Brexit did the referendum mandate? No single one. And right now you've got exactly what you voted for.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: 1984 !

        Rich 11, the form of "get out of the European Union". Just because people like you want to find anything to overturn the result does not mean the vote was any less valid.

        There was supposed to have been "boilerplate" documents in place that only required the name of the country wishing to leave and the date of departure, plus the selection of the relevant options for percentage tariffs etc; the fact that these did not exist should prove to even the most thick-headed Remainer that the EU never had any intention of ever allowing anyone to leave.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: 1984 !

          >Rich 11, the form of "get out of the European Union".

          @AC - remember the question started with the word "Should". If you have had anything to do with requirements specification you will know that 'Should' is very different to 'Must' and 'Shall'.

          As for overturning the result; currently Mogg and colleagues have been and are doing a very good job and will probably achieve this in June when Westminster gets another vote! :)

        2. Teiwaz

          Re: 1984 !

          You are confusing a consensus leave movement with a single consciousness.

          It's been following the normal pattern for Revolutions quite closely. Most revolutions are invariably followed by civil wars, where the victorious side in the first conflict splinter and turn on eachother while the losing side in the first conflict remains unified in their opposition to the revolution.

          Leave was a unifying objective, but it's adherents all had differing notions of what that meant.

          No plan, no strategy, just lies on the sides of buses.

        3. Rich 11 Silver badge

          Re: 1984 !

          "Get out of the European Union, I don't care how" or "Get out of the European Union, I do care how and this is the agreement I'd like to see"? It does matter, you know. Like I said, you've got exactly what you voted for. Or perhaps you'd like to let us know your preference?

          the fact that these did not exist should prove to even the most thick-headed Remainer that the EU never had any intention of ever allowing anyone to leave.

          The fact that the Prime Minister could write a letter right now setting tomorrow as the date for the UK leaving the UK without any withdrawal agreement, but is only stopped from doing so by a law passed by the UK Parliament, should tell even the most thick-headed Brexiter that the EU doesn't have all the power the lying Brexiters claim it has.

        4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: 1984 !

          There was supposed to have been "boilerplate" documents in place that only required the name of the country wishing to leave and the date of departure

          Really? Could you point to something that says that, other than Leave bumph.

      2. streaky

        Re: 1984 !

        Exactly which form of Brexit did the referendum mandate? No single one.

        Leaving the EU means leaving the EU. Only one single option matches that description and I'll give you a hint: it doesn't involve a customs union, single market membership or freedom of movement or not being able to - effectively or actually - negotiate trade deals.

        What governments do once we've left is up to them (though I have some ideas) - but the mandate of leaving the EU is so clear even remainers managed to figure it out.

        First principles. The mandate is judged on what voters were told in the referendum process. It was clear what leaving meant. Trying to retcon it after the fact doesn't change the facts, this stuff is easy to test.

        1. sed gawk Silver badge

          WE have left.

          We took back control of our borders, look there is water surrounding our island nation.

          We took back control of our money, we now use the pound and not the euro.

          We took back control of our laws, passing acts in our very own houses of parliament.

          We took back sovereignty allowing our judges to decide on cases in our own courts.

          We have left.

          Oh, no we could do that already, you total cockwomble.

        2. Rich 11 Silver badge

          Re: 1984 !

          The mandate is judged on what voters were told in the referendum process. It was clear what leaving meant.

          Daniel Hannan said it wouldn't mean leaving the single market.

          Michael Gove said it would mean leaving the single market, but he still wanted access to it. He also claimed that every country in Europe except for Belarus was part of a free trade zone, and claimed that leaving the UK wouldn't mean we left this zone. He eventually accepted that the zone he had described didn't exist and he was confusing access to the single market with the customs union, including the partial customs union agreed with Turkey.

          Arron Banks favoured the Norway option, which meant staying in the customs union.

          Nigel Farage said it would mean leaving both the single market and the customs union.

          Unfortunately I've forgotten exactly what Boris Johnson and David Davies said. My brain had given up by then.

          Please note that only one of the above is achievable under a No Deal Brexit, and clearly not all of the high-profile campaigners were in favour of it in the run-up to the referendum. Some still aren't.

          this stuff is easy to test

          Glad I could help you test it.

        3. John Smith 19 Gold badge
          FAIL

          "The mandate is judged on what voters were told in the referendum process"

          A massive pack of lies by the Leave campaign.

          I've looked at some of the ads they spewed out to the 3 million undecideds whose details their sub-contractors had stolen "acquired" from Facebook and they have (literally) b**ger all to do with things the EU actually controls.

          Nothing.

          Not a thing.

          A billion ads is about 16 for every man, woman and child in the UK.

          The tactics of Joseph Goebbels are alive and well in the 21st century. Yeay for that.

          This is the true price of failing to teach basic critical thinking skills (or bu***hit detection) in UK schools over decades of failure.

    2. Kane Silver badge
      Joke

      Re: 1984 !

      Please, please, please invest in some commas. Here, you can have some of mine:

      ,,,,,,,

    3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: 1984 !

      Can you make a reasoned argument (not an unpunctuated stream of consciousness) to explain why an advisory referendum should be considered a mandate.

      The present mess is a first rate example of why a non-binding referendum - or any referendum that doesn't produce a supermajority - should be avoided as a means of making constitutional change.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: 1984 !

        Doctor Syntax, the number of Remoaners who would be more than happy to accept even a single vote win if the result had been Remain gives the lie to the excuse that it was "too close".

        Besides, you might have noticed that "Remain" didn't get *any* sort of majority so following your own argument, that option should be removed and we should leave. T'is sport indeed to see the engineer hoist on his own petard!

        1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: 1984 !

          There were various options available in the wake of a slight majority in an advisory vote. A sensible one as for any major undertaking, would have been to undertake a feasibility study and/or an impact assessment. An impact assessment might have looked (amongst other things) at what would be the likely impact on, say, the order book of Scunthorpe steel plant and the knock on effect on the viability of the plant and the direct and indirect consequences for employment. At that point people could have been asked to vote in a binding referendum once they knew whether or not their vote might cost them their job.

          So what happened? Refusing to acknowledge that the country was deeply divided on the matter it was eyes closed and charge. Invoke Article 50 without any significant planning at all. Now we're in a hole but never mind, keep digging.

    4. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: 1984 !

      Brexit as mandated by the referendum was confused and unclear (52-48%), so be happy because that's what you've got.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: 1984 !

        Dan 55,

        52% Leave, 48% Remain. What exactly is unclear in that?

        1. BebopWeBop

          Re: 1984 !

          What is unclear about what anonymous? Could you just be clear on the matter?

        2. Dan 55 Silver badge

          Re: 1984 !

          Nothing at all if you're a child who thinks in black and white.

        3. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

          Re: 1984 !

          "52% Leave, 48% Remain. What exactly is unclear in that?"

          Nothing. It clearly means that the country was deeply divided. That's a terrible start for a major change like that so what did May do? She assumed the country was united and has persisted in insulting half of them by keeping telling them that. Is it any wonder she's in a mess?

          1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
            FAIL

            "Is it any wonder she's in a mess?"

            Her behaviour makes perfect sense.

            If you've spent time around people on the autistic spectrum.

            The complete inability to read people.

            The inability to stop following a fixed pattern, even when all indications are that it's not working.

            No ability to infer consequences from written statements (there are tests normal 6YO's can pass that ASD sufferers can't in this area).

            The only reason she hasn't tried to get the agreement voted on for a 4th time is because she's finally leaving. That must have taken something not far short of "F**k off you retard" spray painted on the wall of the Cabinet meeting room for her to realize she might be having trouble.

    5. hammarbtyp Silver badge

      Re: 1984 !

      The arguments over the last 2 years have been about what Brexit the 51% voted for. Since none of them appear to be able to agree which clusterfuck they want its seems quite reasonable to ask the question again

      Do keep up!

      1. Nick Kew

        Re: 1984 !

        British Airways recently provided us the metaphor for that.

        A tiny majority may have voted to "leave". But on leaving London, are you bound for Edinburgh or Dusseldorf? Noone knows, noone agrees, and 52 percent have a lot more than 52 destinations.

    6. Siberian Hamster

      Re: 1984 !

      Please, for the love of [DEITY], learn to use full stops.

  25. Chris Hills

    In bed with the Saudis and Chinese

    Democracy falls further down the slippery slope.

  26. Augie

    Wow.. just wow.. is there a way of getting off this ride?

    1. Dan 55 Silver badge

      You've still got FoM until the can hits the wall and then you'll be grandfathered into residency for that EU country.

  27. the future is back!

    Intel 4 amateurs

    George? smile at the camera please.

  28. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    Quick Fix for Easy Pay to Captivating Prey

    The abiding titanic hole guaranteeing a deep and dark grave to colossal ships of paramilitarised state, is catastrophically damaging, secret security intelligence being known of by a few, but easily made generally available to the masses, from other private sources and renegade rogue pirate agents neither privy nor party to gagging by any signing of any Official Secrets Act.

    One imagines a prime quick emergency fix is to pay source a commanding top price for a stunning silence/pregnant pause, for the advantage of being first to be able to lead further into the future without such secret security intelligence information being used to create a whole series of almighty problems for systems solutions.

    It's only flash cash after all, and nothing really valuable, so best make it a realistically high price commensurate with the risk of containing a catastrophically damaging event situation with destructive virtual cascades.

  29. Cliff Thorburn

    And each day we head further and further from a country of both value and virtue, to a bendy and crooked banana republic, operating under the laws of the jungle, rather than lawful straight shooting democratic world leader we once were, I wonder whether I was looking through rose coloured glasses until recent times.

    1. John Smith 19 Gold badge
      Thumb Up

      "to a bendy and crooked banana republic, "

      I saw what you did there.

      And I like it.*

      *The neat word play. Not the British economy going down the sh***er of history while some disaster capitalists clean up big.

  30. amanfromMars 1 Silver badge

    An International Rot and Intentional Virtual Blot/Bot on Landscapes? Yes, of course it is.

    Live evil supplies dangerous truths to deny exist and cause a resultant conflict and chaos, madness and mayhem. Only the moronic fool and idiotic tool would think them a wise and wide asset base to support with an untenable program of explosively gratuitous implosive prosecution?

    And there appears to be no shortage of moronic fools and idiotic tools cloaked in faux ermine and battling against Perl too [Practical Extraction and Reporting Language] if one can believe what is reported? ....... France Threatens Journalists With Jail Time For Exposing Government Lies About Yemen

  31. Cliff Thorburn

    “if one hasn't signed to acknowledge understanding and wilful compliance with terms of the Act, one cannot be prosecuted for breaking it?”

    I for one agree amFM, and indeed, what constitutes such information?

    There be a veritable minefield of such, could such be the truth as to where humanity is not alone?, that there be alien phorms living indeed amongst us?, that the DVLA is going to have one less job to do after Brexit?, or knowledge of interaction in live operational virtual environments with great game, spread betting ponzi aplenty to suggest but a few examples of fact seperated from plausable deniable fiction.

    ‘Knowingly’ is the key word here I do believe, and if one is not informed, paid and signed in agreed silence, then how could one not simply be sharing nothing more than experience and learning?

  32. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Well talking of traitors may be Theresa and most of her cabinet should be prosecuted considering they have been doing exactly the opposite of what they promised on Brexit and ignored the Brexit referendum. Who are the traitors?

  33. Spanners Silver badge
    Mushroom

    People who betray Britain

    Would that include groups who conspired with financial traders and foreigners to destroy our economy for profit?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021