Big Brother Coastguard

[Jools_of_Top_Cat]

These are my thoughts

John, I respect you as a coastguard and when you write on here you are writing as John not HMCG, hence the caveat in your sig, but I think you would be wise to change your user name to respect this. This is an oximoron if you like, obviously put your occupation in your details but you sig makes out you are responding on the forum as an official capacity.

Just a thought

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=blue> Julian </font color=blue>

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.ukstaffords.com>http://www.ukstaffords.com</A>

 

[Robin]

Nothing against HMCG service, just giving access to information that could be mis-used. I'm a firm believer in the old adage that says if it can happen it will. HMCG has some justification, much more than some of the other govt depts, but they have managed well enough in the past.

What is wrong with having to apply for a warrant/court order whatever to be given this access in an individual case, this system works for the police I believe for search warrants. At least this means that someone is accountable, with modern communications this could be obtained very quickly 24/7 via phone then fax or email. There are 60 million of us or thereabouts in the UK, why should all 60 million have to give up our privacy for 250 (CG figs) or so cases per year all of which in the past (CG report says) were solved in other ways. Yes it might save money and or time, so do it - but under control and in an accountable way, no sledge hammers to crack nuts.

Bye the bye, just because HMCG is a highly respected organisation does not mean there is no risk of a bad apple - there have been plenty of examples of bad apples found amongst the police, also a highly respected organisation.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[charles_reed]

But he\'d have legal recourse

In the civil courts against anyone who gave a competitor personal information.

If someone in a statutory body passed on this information the burden of proof, because it was a criminal offence, would be far more onerous and he'd not be automatically entitled to damages.

The nub of the question is WHY do HMCG need this information - to "help people in distress" is so palpably untrue as have any defence offered be regarded with deep suspicion.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Jools_of_Top_Cat]

If you want to know who is listening in

Industrial espionage is apparently ripe, but it is not coming from our own agencies who think they need all this info, <A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.nukem.freeserve.co.uk/contents/localarea/menwith/>have a read</A>

<hr width=100% size=1><font color=blue> Julian </font color=blue>

<A target="_blank" HREF=http://www.ukstaffords.com>http://www.ukstaffords.com</A>

 

[AOWYN]

And get rid of your radio, and your boat and your car, your house, your national insurance number and stop paying tax to the bastards.

It would be interesting to see how far the fascist s would get if they had to fund themselves on voluntary contributions

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[TheBoatman]

I seem to remember signing a secrecy agreement when I passed my VHF ticket. That I would not pass on any information or make gains from it. How does that effect HMGC?

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[kgi]

Re: If you want to know who is listening in

Yes, you see technically our govt cannot intrude on our privacy, so all they do is ask there US counterpart sitting next to them to do it, of course we reciprocate for them, as i understand it the aussies shafted the US by using information gleaned from this system (echelon)to do a trade deal, as the website sez each station has a computer "dictionary" that looks for key words, each of the dictionaries at each station has different nuances to pick up the local bad guys, like everything there are ways to beat the system, some of them being really simple, by the way did you know that the anthrax used in the US may have been developed at CWE Porton Down?.........its a funny old world...........keith

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[Cornishman]

Nobody forces you to listen to weather forecasts, and as far as I am aware there is no mechanism set up to monitor who listens to R4 Long Wave.
A year or so ago the RNLI published the results of a questionnaire completed by those whom they had rescued, and it transpired that 80% of casualties had not listened to any form of weather forecast before setting out. Not quite sure what that tells us, but I do find it astounding.

<hr width=100% size=1>

 

[bigmart]

No you are quite right nobody forces you to listen to weather forecasts &, to my knowledge, we cannot be monitored for when listening to Radio 4.

When will the shipping forecasts on BBC radio die out because there is a more efficient, cheaper way to get this information, perhaps the Internet? I am just surmising.

When I started sailing we crossed channel in a 22 footer with a tranny radio & a small pack of flares. Today you would would be villified if you tried as similar passage without a comprehensive set of safety gear.

The point is that you can question all my comments, & pull them apart to make me sound paranoid, but there is social & political pressure to embrace new technologies. The usual argument is that there is a significant cost saving in administration. An unfortunate side effect of the latest offerings is that they make it easier, for those that would wish to, to monitor us & those that think they are innocent with nothing to fear will happily throw away our freedom.

Like I keep saying to those in the "If you've got nothing to hide what have you got to fear" camp. I have nothing to fear, Today but I don't have a fully functioning Crystal Ball.

Perhaps thats another form of technology I should embrace.

Martin



<hr width=100% size=1>