Snooper's Charter is set to become law

[FlyingJesus]

Food Standards Agency gonna be looking into my activities because I'm too damn delicious *+*+*+*+

[xxMATTGxx]

Bit of an update:

The European Court of Justice has ruled against the UK government following a legal challenge over data retention.

EU judges said communications data could only be retained if it was used to fight serious crime.
The legal challenge was initially championed by Brexit Secretary David Davis, who was then a backbench Conservative MP.

The Home Office said it was "disappointed" with the judgement and would consider its implications.
The Lib Dems said the ruling proved the government had "overstepped the mark" with its Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act, branded the "snoopers' charter" by critics, which requires communications companies to retain data for 12 months.

'Proper scrutiny'
The ECJ said a "general and indiscriminate retention" of data was against EU law and could only be done under certain conditions and "solely for the purpose of fighting serious crime".
Its ruling confirmed a preliminary verdict in July. The case now returns to the UK Court of Appeal, which had referred it to the ECJ for clarification.

Mr Davis, who had long campaigned on civil liberties issues, left the case after Theresa May appointed him to her cabinet in July.

Tom Watson, Labour's deputy leader, who is one of those bringing the case, said: "This ruling shows it's counter-productive to rush new laws through Parliament without a proper scrutiny."
The Home Office said it would be putting forward "robust arguments" to the Court of Appeal.
It added: "Given the importance of communications data to preventing and detecting crime, we will ensure plans are in place so that the police and other public authorities can continue to acquire such data in a way that is consistent with EU law and our obligation to protect the public."
The data in question refers to details such as the time and data of a phone call being made or an email being sent - but not its contents.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38390150

[-:Undertaker:-]

The High Court had already ruled against HM Government on this but it went to the ECJ as the Government appealed the decision. It is being portrayed as the British courts gave it the go-ahead and the European court knocked it back, that's just not true.

As opposed to the legislation as I am, I rather loathe courts becoming involved in political issues and certain foreign courts. If a piece of legislation is passed that I do not like, my response is to take it to the country at a General Election and allow the public to decide. That said, even if the European court had ruled in favour of the Government it wouldn't have lasted long as we'll be withdrawing from the ECJ in a couple of years times.

"I would sooner receive injustice in the Queen's courts than justice in a foreign court. I hold that man or woman to be a scoundrel who goes abroad to a foreign court to have the judgments of the Queen's courts overturned, the actions of her Government countermanded or the legislation of Parliament struck down." - Enoch Powell

One of my all-time favourite quotes.