[francis-io]

"Additional safeguards have been introduced – notably, in the most recent round of amendments, a 'triple-lock' authorization process for surveillance of parliamentarians ..."

Thank god, I'm glad the politicians that passed this law will be protected from it /s

[causal]

This, and requiring tech companies to consult the government before rolling out security updates, make it seem evident that safety isn't really the motivation.

[BoxOfRain]

It brings to mind the fact the Inner Party of Oceania had the privilege of turning their telescreens off.

[kypro]

I'm a cool headed person, but reading that sentence was rage inducing for me.

There's literally no good argument to protect politicians other than corruption.

If politicians are worried these powers could be used to target them then it could be used to target literally anyone, and the concern shouldn't have been that they could be target, but that anyone could be targeted.

Plus, if this bill is only going to stop bad guys then they should have anything to worry about anyway right? I mean isn't this what we are told!? Should we be worried about these powers being abused or not!?

What a fucking joke.

[kmeisthax]

I bet you in 10 years there will be a scandal where the Tories spied on an opposing party MP, or vice versa. Doesn't even need malicious intent because the mere act of doing this carries the stench of malicious incompetence.