Well we can qualify things to our argument's benefit all day, but the underlying point of trusting that a government will always be a "good actor" is a proven flawed premise.
I don't think one needs to believe tha the government is always a good actor. The question is if the benefits of surveillance to say, public safety and order will outweigh the likelyhood of bad outcomes or abuse. That's not a trivial question, and it differs strongly depending on which country we're talking about.