Reply to post: Re: The rule of Unintended Consequences - yet again

Here's the little-known legal loophole that permitted mass surveillance in the UK

Anonymous Coward
Anonymous Coward

Re: The rule of Unintended Consequences - yet again

"you will quickly see that an MP who did nothing but read draft legislation, full time, could only cover about 10% of it. They do have other things to do."

You do realise that MPs have expenses that allow them to employ support staff? I don't see where it says that a group of MPs with, say, an interest in civil liberties couldn't employ an expert to scan Bills for potential implications. Years ago I belonged to an industry body who employed people to do precisely that in respect of industrial policy; if our elected representatives won't step up to the wicket then the only scrutiny is by lobbyists and commercial bodies and, as Hitchens put it last week, you end up with the best government hedge funds can buy.

The biggest threat to democracy, in fact, is the leadership of the political parties who try to neuter their own MPs, and it is clear why they all hate Corbyn who has just drawn attention to this fact.

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 © 1998–2019