As the government’s new cabinet is gradually being revealed, let us return to the last cabinet reshuffle which began less than a year ago on Monday, 14th July. While always arguably purely coincidental, the fact is that on the same day the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act (DRIPA) began its journey through Parliament, reaching Royal Ascent on Thursday. The typically long and scrupulous process of getting a bill through Parliament and into law was completed in just three days. As was to be expected, the majority of the media for the day was focused on the reshuffle (this is the point where I am supposed to assert that the media is a mass of right-wing bias, until someone on the right corrects me by asserting the opposite). Any coverage concerning the bill was best found on Twitter or via a short link in the corner of a page on the BBC News website, though at least one could observe precisely what was happening on BBC Parliament.

Briefly and with unapologetic bias, DRIPA was not an attempt at gaining initial permission to collect particular data related to individually suspected citizens, but to legalise and justify illegal and inexcusable privacy violations committed by the likes of the Government Communication Headquarters (GCHQ), who as shown by classified documents leaked by Edward Snowden are performing mass collections of data without so much as an occasional warrant.

Putting aside differing opinions on the contents of the bill, the sorts of proposals included were clearly controversial and, more importantly and dangerously, reactionary, in response to the growing threat of ISIS, not only as a physical force but as an effective producer of online propaganda and thus breeder of ISIS supporters within the UK (there may have been the factor of the EU clearly condemning GCHQ and National Security Agency (NSA) activities as being illegal, but let us not be conspirators…). All the same, it was forced through Parliament in a matter of days and with such unbelievable ease. Particularly incredible is that this was not a success purely creditable to the Conservatives, but in conjunction with the other two main parties at the time, Labour and the Liberal Democrats. To have the opposition back the government up on such a disgraceful misuse of the Parliamentary system is one thing, but to have in addition a party designed to be representative of liberal ideals jump on the bandwagon so easily still seems inconceivable, part of a coalition or not. This to me is more detestable than any rise in tuition fees (I will leave my student comrades to that battle, it has enough support already that I can keep quiet). A broken promise is not equivalent to an utter betrayal of basic liberal principles that those of us who do think ourselves liberals (most of the time) consider so important. This was completely ignoring the supposed right to privacy for all citizens, as lined out in the European Convention on Human Rights. After little debate in the Commons, where a few admirable backbenchers played their part in attempting to resist this wave of MPs towing the party line, few of who even so much as showed up for the absurdly minimal amount of debating, the bill was not even successfully amended so as to require a re-examination at the end of 2015, and the bill was ready to be signed into law by the Queen that Thursday.

Blanket surveillance and data collection are by no means new, nor is the government finished justifying and seeking the use of these processes, which are sinister compromises of our fundamental individual freedoms and civil liberties, achieved under the guise of being benign and at an especially alarming and suspicious pace. Theresa May is already promoting the introduction of what is commonly referred to as the “Snooper’s Charter”, as David Cameron remains intent on scrapping the Human Rights Act. We should always remain wary of, and seek to avoid as frequently as possible, situations where the government wins at the expense of the democratic process.