Mother challenges council over spying powers
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
A mother-of-three has branded Poole Borough Council "ludicrous and completely outrageous" as she took the authority to court for using controversial powers to spy on her family.
The council was accused of playing "fast and loose" in its attempts to establish whether Jenny Paton's children lived in the correct school catchment area.
Her complaint surrounds the use of the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (Ripa).
Speaking before a landmark two-day Investigatory Powers Tribunal hearing in central London, Ms Paton, 40, said: "Some of the operational aspects are ludicrous and completely outrageous and, I think, we all need protecting from the way local authorities are using Ripa. This is about saying 'no more' - let's have more safeguards and better scrutiny."
James Welch, a lawyer from Liberty which is representing Ms Paton, said: "We are asking this tribunal to declare that the surveillance powers used to watch Ms Paton were unlawful. This is not about the money - it's about the legal principle."
It is alleged a council official made notes documenting the comings and goings of the mother-of-three and her partner, Tim Joyce, for nearly three weeks to find out if the family lived at an address in the catchment area for Lilliput First School.
Ms Paton questioned why officials did not simply knock on the door and speak to her if they doubted her story.
Ripa, dubbed a "snooper's charter", is used to monitor relatively trivial offences by some local councils.
The hearing comes as it was learned that Ripa - introduced in 2000 to give the police, security services and Revenue and Customs the powers to spy on people in the fight against crime and terrorism - will be used to track down parents who refuse to pay child support.
Investigators will be given access to the phone and internet records of thousands of fathers who lie about their wealth or refuse to co-operate with the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission.
School admissions are a dinner party hot topic of conversation along with property prices, Gordon Nardell, representing the family, told the hearing's judging panel.
Mr Nardell said: "The complainants have and were found to have played by the rules but this local authority played fast and loose."
He told the hearing her family could had been proven to have been living in the right area by other means than spying.
He added: "It's a hot topic at the moment. School admissions are second only or joint first with property prices in pubs and around dinner tables in the south."
He said the case was about "liberty" and the "extraordinary powers" of local authorities.
The family was watched 21 times over three weeks around February last year, the hearing was told.
Mr Nardell said it was "quite extraordinary" the surveillance was authorised.
After revealing how family members were reported as being watched in a log, he added: "It speaks for itself in terms of its extent."
Investigators were watching "comings and goings" from the family's home address and following a car, he said.
Mr Nardell added: "There is plainly an interference with home life."
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Seriously though, I think it's time we all started giving these 'Powers that be' the hell they deserve for their hubristic designs. These folks are supposed to be working *for* us, not monitoring each detail of our lives.
I know the 'Nineteen Eighty Four was a warning, not a blueprint' trope is getting a bit tired now, and Government surveillance of the population, together with their tracking and use of police as political enforcers, is becoming 'old news'.
However it's still there, and we need to ensure that the measures and tech in place are properly kicked down and that we start reclaiming our freedoms and privacy.
Cameron has pledged to scrap ID cards: we need to ensure he gets rid of the National Identity register that sits behind it as well. You know, the database that gets updated with details of each time the ccard is used, or any other part of the database is accessed for whatever reason.
What's happening with the DNA database? Not a lot, from what I can work out. A few grudging removals, but that's about it...
How about the vehicle tracking plans? We're still tracked on all our journeys by cameras. Great.
The database that contains details of everyone who travels anywhere, and who they travel with... How long is that data being held for? Who's got access?
What about the requirements to log our phone calls, emails and text messages? Watered down, but still in place.
...And so on...
Once our freedoms and privacy have been taken from us, it's tricky to get them back. I don't believe Governmnets will cede such powers without a huge amount of push back from the population, so good on Jenny Paton!
(1) Everyone has the right for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
(2) There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.
(Quoted from the Act itself.
I've heard that it's one reason the Conservatives are so eager to repeal that Act. The whole thing makes very interesting reading.)
Edited at 2009-11-05 02:32 pm (UTC)
I suppose people think this idea of parental choice of school is a new idea. Well they are wrong. Earlier this afternoon, I was watching an episode of "Yes, Prime Minister". There are no prizes for guessing what the episode was about. Hacker wanted to ditch the central government education authority and give control of schools to local authorities, and ALLOW PARENTS TO CHOOSE WHICH SCHOOLS TO SEND THEIR CHILDREN TO. Humphrey was not amused. I tell you one thing, "Yes, Prime Minister," was probably a lot funnier than what went on in the actual cabinet office when Brown was discussing such things.
There's to much of this spying lark going on that is not necessary, I'd put a stop to it if I could, but what the hell, what do I know.