You are here

Debating Intelligence and Surveillance

Commentary, 14 October 2013
Intelligence, Technology, Terrorism, Europe
Where should the limits surveillance be placed? And how should intelligence oversight work? Following his first public speech delivered at RUSI, Andrew Parker, Director General of MI5 sparked off a national and international debate about the current terrorist threat and the role of surveillance and intelligence.

Andrew Parker Security Service [thumbnail]

On Monday 8 October 2013, Andrew Parker, Director General of the Security Service (MI5) chose the Royal United Services Institute to deliver his first public lecture.

His remarks sparked off a national and international debate about the current terrorist threat and the role of surveillance and intelligence.

Click here to read the full speech >

Responses

In Defence of National Security Scrutiny
By James Ball, Data Editor, The Guardian
The MI5 director’s speech to RUSI generated a national debate which singled out for implicit criticism The Guardian for its role in leaking sensitive intelligence. Here, the paper’s data editor questions why the public should be asked to accept blanket assurances that their privacy and security are protected.

The Snowden Leaks: The Need to Update Our Legislation on Data and Security
The recent leaks about the surveillance capabilities of our intelligence agencies have undoubtedly harmed national security. Nevertheless, they also provide a long overdue opportunity to update legislation that will help security agencies and protect the rights of individuals.

The Snowden Leaks Were Damaging to National Security, but the Subsequent Debate May Benefit Us All
By Charlie Edwards, Senior Research Fellow and Director of National Security and Resilience, RUSI
In his first public speech at RUSI, the Director-General rightly suggested that the leaks from Edward Snowden  gave terrorists 'the gift to evade us and strike at will'. Nevertheless, the revelations should now be an opportunity to have a mature national conversation on the heirachy of accountability in intelligence gathering.  

 

Background

Briefing: Re-Balancing Security and Justice - The Reform of UK Counter-Terrorism Legislation
This paper argues that the key political question for the Coalition Government to address is how far intelligence agencies should keep secrets to themselves and at what point greater transparency should indeed be demanded.

Analysis

Is the Government's Communications Bill a Charter for Snoopers?
Proposals by the government to allow law enforcement officers greater access to communications data will draw understandable criticism from privacy campaigners.alysis

Silver Bullets and Telephone Calls: Intercept Evidence, Security and the Quest for Justice
Criminal prosecution is central to the Government’s counter-terrorism strategy.

 

Subscribe to our Newsletter

Support Rusi Research