back to article Activists gatecrash Capita's AGM to protest GPS tracking contract

We hear Privacy International and a few other campaign groups set up camp outside Capita's AGM in London yesterday protesting Capita's involvement as an outsourcer in a UK government GPS tracking contract. The groups, who drove a billboard van to the London shareholders meeting and were distributing leaflets outside, claim the …

  1. nematoad
    Big Brother

    Just wait

    "Under human rights law, children under 18 and pregnant women can't be tagged."

    Don't worry, I'm sure that in the bowels of the Home Office someone is working on a plan to side-step such inconvenient laws and grab anyone they can and tag them.

    I don't know what it is about being appointed Home Secretary, and it's not even as if the contagion is confined to the Conservatives. John Reid, Jack Straw and David Blunkett all called on their inner authoritarian when they were in office, so Suella Braverman is merely following in an appalling tradition.

    1. VoiceOfTruth

      Re: Just wait

      -> I don't know what it is about being appointed Home Secretary

      Amen. They are all basically fascists in sheep's clothing. They are all ready to outdo each other in nastiness.

      1. Martin-73 Silver badge

        Re: Just wait

        Not so much of the sheep's clothing, I usually try not to invoke Godwin, but this lot sail close to that line... back then it was stars of david, now it's GPS tags

    2. Jason Bloomberg Silver badge
      Big Brother

      Re: Just wait

      I'm surprised those working for Westminster City Council and other innocent people arrested for intending to disrupt the coronation haven't been charged with wasting police time.

      1. Martin-73 Silver badge

        Re: Just wait

        Don't give them ideas

    3. Brian 3

      Re: Just wait

      This law is meaningless, because there will of course be no punishment for those in the government who violate it.

    4. Ideasource Bronze badge

      Re: Just wait

      Odd that only pregnant women and children qualify as as human in this human right.

      So for all intents and purposes, all else are considered less than human...

      human rights apply to All humans without regard for circumstance.

      So this isn't being executed as a human right. Not by any competent measure anyway. This is executed as a privilege of children and pregnant women.

      This is filed under the wrong category.

      My irritation in this is akin to a librarian finding a book about reptiles misplaced in the automotive engineering section.

      It seems quite inappropriate.

  2. Sir Sham Cad

    "We urge Capita to take a principled stance"



    Seriously? Crapita?

    Bwahahaha etc...

    Fucking good luck with that one!

  3. John Robson Silver badge

    Should not be blindly profiting...

    They aren't - they're profiting with their eyes wide open, they just see cash as more important than people...

  4. Pascal Monett Silver badge

    "Outsourcer asked to take 'principled stance' "

    Companies have one principle : making money. It is the Prime Principle (yes, I'm thinking Prime Directive).

    And, as soon as start to, they forget every other principle in direct correlation with how much money they make.

    Once you get to Board status with more than a billion per month, the Singularity forms and everything is swallowed down to the Prime Principle.

    No (known) force in the Universe can stop that.

  5. Missing Semicolon Silver badge

    Sorry to be dim

    But don't we have a bit of a job chucking out people who don't have the right to be here? I mean, unless you think that we shouldn't be doing that at all.

    1. dogcatcher

      Re: Sorry to be dim

      and if they weren't here in the first place then we wouldn't have to pay Crapita to monitor them.

    2. Richard 12 Silver badge

      Re: Sorry to be dim

      Processing claims is massively underfunded.

      Instead, the Home Office are burning billions upon billions of pounds on detaining more and more people as the backlog continues to grow.

      The only viable explanations are that Braverman is getting some brown envelopes from these suppliers, or she is is so incompetent that she couldn't run a bath.

      The fact that she is an evil monster intent on breaking the law is indisputable, of course.

      1. LybsterRoy Silver badge

        Re: Sorry to be dim

        OK, lets say we process all claims withing 24 hours (I know impossible but lets imagine it) and then the ones who have their claim refused quietly go home. Well, if you can imagine claims being processed within 24 hours you can imagine them going home quietly - I CAN'T!

  6. Martin-73 Silver badge

    "Immigration is dealt with under criminal law"

    "Immigration is dealt with by criminals"... FTFY.

    The border farce caused traffic chaos in Southampton today, those people, and the home office, are complete scum.

    1. Martin-73 Silver badge

      Re: "Immigration is dealt with under criminal law"

      please downvoters explain, or is it just i am boring with my hatred of immigration officials. My wife was denied entry to the UK because she had no job... nor did the idiot with the rubber stamp. She was an immigration 'asshole'

  7. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

    Eh what?

    Immigration is dealt with under criminal law, meaning someone accused of breaking the rules, even a person who has never committed a criminal offence, could be fitted with one.

    Privacy International told us that "anyone without leave to remain can be tagged, whether they've committed a criminal offence or not."

    Staying well away from the morals, rightness or wrongness of the law, but the above doesn't make sense within the context of the law as it stands. If you break the immigration rules or overstay, then that is currently a criminal offence so by definition they have committed a crime. The problem as I see it is not only the law as it stands, but the way it seems to be enforced without trial. Maybe the protesters would be better spending their time and money fighting against that rather than going after the "small fry" of the people operating the tagging system.

    1. Richard 12 Silver badge

      Re: Eh what?

      The trouble is that judicial review is incredibly expensive, slow, and fairly ineffective as the ministers in question have already announced that they intend to break the law.

      Convincing suppliers not to supply has historically produced some results. Unlikely to work with Crapita because Government are their only customer. Everyone else contracts vaguely competent suppliers.

    2. LybsterRoy Silver badge

      Re: Eh what?

      I find myself in a quandary. I like the idea of a fair trial but I have difficulty envisaging it.

      Judge: You entered the country illegally

      Illegal Immigrant: No your honour I've been here all along and here are 50 witnesses to prove it

      Judge: Oh, that's ok then off you go and have a nice day....


      Judge: You entered the country illegally

      Illegal Immigrant: No your honour II was playing cards with my mate Jim at his chippy at the time the Officer says I entered the country

      Judge: Oh, that's ok then off you go and have a nice day....

      errrr can anyone come up with a better scenario?

      1. Graham Cobb Silver badge

        Re: Eh what?

        The fact of entering the country without paperwork is not usually in dispute. The point is that there are many laws which permit that. One major one is the Human Rights Act which brings the UK's treaty obligations to provide refuge for refugees into law.

        1. Martin-73 Silver badge

          Re: Eh what?

          in this case i will argue the letter of the law doesn't matter. I WILL obstruct immigration cnuts wherever possible, including chanting get a job

      2. Martin-73 Silver badge

        Re: Eh what?

        Your honour (or worship) i claim asylum.

        Judge you are now legal.

        THAT is how it works. There is NO SUCH THING as an illegal immigrant until they break the law, and even then they themselves are not illegal

    3. Martin-73 Silver badge

      Re: Eh what?

      Kinda like trying to explain to the US (I genuinely forget what they're called right now, used to be INS) that the constitution absolutely DOES apply to people on US soil, and pretending that your holding cells are not on US soil is bullcrap, like gitmo.... they're all assholes

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

Other stories you might like