Advertisement
UK markets close in 7 hours 40 minutes
  • FTSE 100

    7,825.97
    -51.08 (-0.65%)
     
  • FTSE 250

    19,276.61
    -174.06 (-0.89%)
     
  • AIM

    741.39
    -3.90 (-0.52%)
     
  • GBP/EUR

    1.1678
    -0.0005 (-0.04%)
     
  • GBP/USD

    1.2447
    +0.0008 (+0.07%)
     
  • Bitcoin GBP

    51,879.86
    +2,701.95 (+5.49%)
     
  • CMC Crypto 200

    1,326.98
    +14.36 (+1.10%)
     
  • S&P 500

    5,011.12
    -11.09 (-0.22%)
     
  • DOW

    37,775.38
    +22.07 (+0.06%)
     
  • CRUDE OIL

    83.84
    +1.11 (+1.34%)
     
  • GOLD FUTURES

    2,404.10
    +6.10 (+0.25%)
     
  • NIKKEI 225

    37,068.35
    -1,011.35 (-2.66%)
     
  • HANG SENG

    16,225.96
    -159.91 (-0.98%)
     
  • DAX

    17,634.42
    -202.98 (-1.14%)
     
  • CAC 40

    7,952.81
    -70.45 (-0.88%)
     

UK lawmakers criticise government's planned new surveillance law

LONDON, Feb 9 (Reuters) - The British government's planned law to give spies and the police wide-ranging new surveillance powers is rushed, does not do enough to protect people's privacy and requires major change, a powerful committee of lawmakers said on Tuesday.

Britain unveiled a Draft Investigatory Powers Bill in November which would give agencies powers such as the right to find out what websites people visited - arguing it was needed to protect the public from terrorism, serious crime and paedophiles in the digital age.

However human rights groups and privacy campaigners say the powers risk infringing civil liberties and would allow the authorities to carry out widespread snooping on the public. Major tech companies have also voiced concern over the impact it would have on their data security.

"Overall, the privacy protections are inconsistent and in our view need strengthening," the report by parliament's Intelligence and Security Committee said, describing the bill as a "significant missed opportunity".

"The draft bill appears to have suffered from a lack of sufficient time and preparation," it added, saying the bill adopted a "rather piecemeal approach" to privacy protection which it said should have formed the backbone to the draft legislation. (Reporting by Michael Holden; editing by Stephen Addison)