I doubt it. May has been on that ticket for years (IIRC 2012?), and the mindset it shared amongst the rest of the party. As someone else has said, Amber Rudd is much the same, in the same way that Michael Gove's replacement in education has been more of the same.
I think it's partly ideological, and partly a total lack of understanding of how technology works that leads to it. I've had discussions with people who say they support such a system, and once you explain the technical reasons why that would be a bad idea and the impact on their ability to actually use anything technological, they often soften considerably, and in some cases chance stance completely.
May will take that ticket to her grave; even as a doddery old peer, she'll be declaring that Something Must Be Done (and then dropping the ball when asked about details).
I think two things could happen. A torry-libdem coalition which would kill these nonsensical surveillance laws (libdem vetoed them in the past), or a new general election soon, then all bets are off.
Lib Dems were crucified for their vital and successful minority partner in government for 10-15. The UK population wants a dictator, not a grown up concensus.
This will be a Tory government with DUP support on confidence and supply
There are a fair few tory members (not just backbenchers) who are against May's fetish for ripping up human rights bills and installing a camera in every bathroom.
DUP are fundamentalist christian hard-right tories, but on the other hand they're in Ireland and know a lot about the bad side of state power (despite nominally being on the side of the British government)
Indeed, and this is likely to be a major sticking point with May. You can't really tell any kind of anti-immigrant story with a fully open border, but a fully open border is what peace in Ireland needs, and the DUP fully recognize that.
It's important to understand that support for moderate parties in Northern Ireland has only collapsed because both Sinn Fein and the DUP are seen as being fully committed to the peace.
LibDems ruled out a coalition with anybody last night, they're not willing to step into that fire again - and they fundamentally won't accept either the Tory or Labour policies on Brexit.
That sounds like bullshit. The Parliament is very much on this, you don't need to try to explain it by invoking all-powerful spooks behind the curtains.
The conservatives have a serious problem right now: pragmatism is seen as being ideologically unsound. Look at the amount of briefing against Philip Hammond there's been. We're talking about a fairly competent, pro-Leave chancellor who has merely argued that potential downsides should be evaluated properly before charging ahead. And he's treated like a Traitor To The Cause.
The problem being that Conservative MPs can be competent, moral and a true believer in Brexit. But it seems to be impossible to be all three.
(The last sounds like a joke, but the exception may prove the rule: Stephen Phillips is definitely a true believer, and demonstrated his integrity by quitting his seat due to his horror at the way Brexit was being handled. Boris Johnson, on the other hand, is none of the above.)
I think it's partly ideological, and partly a total lack of understanding of how technology works that leads to it. I've had discussions with people who say they support such a system, and once you explain the technical reasons why that would be a bad idea and the impact on their ability to actually use anything technological, they often soften considerably, and in some cases chance stance completely.