It is not the fact that it does which is the issue, it is the code of conduct
It has to do that to do its job. So nothing wrong with that in principle. It the practice which is broken.
However, what it can do and what it cannot do is formulated (probably deliberately) in a manner which can be best described as a legal fubar. Some of it is common across the board in most developed countries and it is the root of all Snowdens of yesteryear.
1. The code of conduct is internal, not audited and not set in law.
2. The exceptions to the computer misuse, fraud, RIPA, etc are not set in law and are granted by bureaucrat with excessive thinking about the children
3. The application of the code of conduct is not audited externally
Biting the hand that feeds IT
