UK Politics

Unwalled archive link: https://archive.is/0hDcx

How could the UK government’s new digital policy affect the Fediverse? As one of the Fediverse’s leading UK based projects, we thought we’d take a look.

Data on the Fediverse shows that the network is primarily a North American and European project, with a healthy Japanese annex. On server count the UK languishes below Finland and Russia with just 44 servers, compared to 754 in France.

Political instability in France and the recent EU elections will probably matter more to the Fediverse than the ones in the UK. The Netherlands is leading state interest in the Fediverse and funding for many projects comes ultimately from Horizon Europe, Europe’s massive state backed R&D fund.

But, a new, stable government in the UK may create opportunities for change as priorities are reassessed, as opposed to the continuities and chaos in Europe.

The Labour Party’s policy is structured around five core missions that cut across government departments. This means technology & digital policy emerges in support of the missions, rather than as an end in itself.

With massive economic and social issues facing the new government, it is unsurprisingly light on specific tech policy. “AI” is mentioned a few times as an opportunity, but “social media” just once and “internet” is completely absent.

Pulling the threads together, here’s what it means in practice:

...

Taken together, the government vibe is a mix of optimism for the economic potential of the tech sector but an awareness of the negative impacts it can bring if unrestrained.

The mission frameworks indicate a holistically minded approach to government, rather than a set of policy silos. Other priorities such as tackling violence against women & girls, which has a high profile champion in the Home Office, cyber security and democratic reform could end up having big impacts on the shape of cyberspace in the UK.

This moment of change offers a new opportunity. The Fediverse could find an open ear if it can tap into the new government’s more sceptical view of Big Tech and social media, and present itself as a possible alternative. Getting into the conversation early and initiating dialogue about the open social web as the Regulatory Innovation Office is being built ought to be a key objective of public advocacy in the UK.

“Now is not the time for blame”, the Conservative activist and journalist Annunziata Rees-Mogg suggested to her colleagues at the start of the ‘Popular Conservatism’ conference on Tuesday.

It was not a suggestion which any of them seemed willing to countenance.

Instead, over the course of more than three hours, a series of unelected and recently de-elected Conservative politicians revealed a long list people and institutions they blamed for the fact that their own brand of ‘Popular Conservatism’ had inexplicably proved to be quite so unpopular.

For the former Conservative minister and current peer, Lord Frost, the answer was quite simple. His party had been compromised by radical leftists pushing a “flabby mishmash of sub-socialist ideas”.

“On virtually every issue we have followed the collectivist Zeitgeist leftwards”, Frost told the room.

His former colleague and surviving Conservative MP Suella Braverman wholeheartedly agreed, insisting via video link from another hard right political conference in Washington, that her party had made the fatal error of trying to “mimic the Labour party”, while refusing to ever mention real Conservative ideals.

“We didn’t mention immigration,” said Braverman, who had mentioned next to nothing else during her time as Home Secretary.”

“We didn’t want to talk about it, we didn’t want to look at it.”

Later, an audience member suggested that this leftist infiltration had extended right into the heart of the Conservative party’s own campaigning machine, warning that Lib Dem sleeper agents must now be expelled from the party’s headquarters.

Disclaimer: Article is by Workers For a Free Palestine, the ones doing the blockade

Over 1,000 workers and trade unionists shut down access to the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office headquarters in central London this Wednesday morning, demanding that the new Labour Government immediately halt all arms exports to Israel. To try to break the blockade, police dragged protesters across the floor at the Whitehall entrance and arrested six people.

The action comes as Israeli forces launched an assault on, and ordered the evacuation of, parts of a designated humanitarian zone in Khan Younis, killing nearly 100 people in one day, wounding several hundred more and forcing over 150,000 people to flee since Monday. It also follows one of the deadliest weeks in aerial attacks on Gaza since the onslaught started nine months ago and a damning new International Court of Justice ruling about Israel’s occupation clearly violating international law.

After Foreign Affairs Committee Chair Alicia Kearns accused the Foreign Office of hiding legal advice that Israel is breaching International Humanitarian Law in Gaza in March, David Lammy – now Foreign Secretary – demanded the UK Government publish the advice and “suspend the sale of those arms” if the advice shows there is a “clear risk that UK arms might be used in a serious breach of international humanitarian law.”

Today trade unionists are calling on the Foreign Secretary “to practice what he preached in opposition” and “meet his own demands” by immediately publishing the advice and suspending the sale of arms. They are also calling on the Foreign Secretary to withdraw the UK’s legal bid to block the International Criminal Court issuing an arrest warrant for Netanyahu. In Opposition, David Lammy called on David Cameron to drop this, accusing the Conservatives in May 2024 of “U-turning on one of Britain’s most fundamental principles: respect for the rule of law.”
[…]
The ICJ has ruled that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territories – the Gaza Strip, the West Bank and East Jerusalem – is a clear violation of international law. It ruled earlier this year that Israel’s actions in Gaza plausibly amounted to genocide and ordered Israel to comply with provisional measures, which it has failed to do. Even before the latest ICJ ruling, some 600 lawyers, legal academics, and former judges, including former Supreme Court justices and the Court’s former president Lady Hale, warned that the UK government is breaching international law by continuing to arm Israel.

Today’s blockade has been organised by Workers for a Free Palestine in support of civil servants and members of the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) . The Foreign Office and the Department for Business and Trade are involved in granting arms export licences, thus playing a fundamental role in the continued sale of UK weapons used by the Israeli army. Civil servants have requested to “cease work immediately” on arms export licences to Israel over fears they could be complicit in war crimes in Gaza, and their union PCS is considering bringing legal action to prevent their members from being forced to carry out unlawful acts.

I imagine some of these agencies didn't exist before 2010, meaning they got staffed under the Tories. I know viewing the Tories as purely bad is a very simplistic way of looking at things, but when Boris was partying in Downing street and clearly resigning on his duties to protect the public, how come this level of resignation didn't seep into these govt. agencies? From the articles below it seems that even after 14 years fhey still have teeth. Are they independent enough to escape influence from the Cabinet?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/apr/20/the-big-tech-firms-want-an-ai-monopoly-but-the-uk-watchdog-can-bring-them-to-heel https://www.wiltsglosstandard.co.uk/news/national/24470785.data-watchdog-reprimands-school-facial-recognition-canteen-payments/

Okay, something the younger ones amongst you might not he conscious of. For wonkish political nerds in the UK of a certain age (I think roughly ranging from older millennials in their late-30s to the Cameron/Osborne/Clegg/Miliband generation in their mid-50s) and regardless of their political party affiliation (I've found this equally true of Labour, Conservatives and Liberal Democrats), probably the piece of popular culture that has most influenced how they think about the 'romance' of politics is Aaron Sorkin's The West Wing, which aired in the late 1990s and early 2000s. It's brilliant TV and anyone who hasn't seen it should watch it.

Sunak is a very wonkish political nerd in that age bracket. He's also someone with a particular relationship and affiliation with the United States. I would guess he is almost certainly a West Wing fan.

I've been thinking about The West Wing lately because of an article Sorkin wrote for the NYT, comparing the scenario around Biden and the 'will he/won't he' be the Democratic presidential candidate to his season two finale when President Bartlet - who has been concealing from the public that he suffered from multiple scelerosis - disclosed his illness and then, under huge political pressure not to stand for re-election due to his condition, dramatically changed his mind at the last minute and revealed he would.

The ending scene of Bartlet heading to the press conference to the soundtrack of Dire Straits is a top 5 moment for any fan of the series. It's tipping it down with rain and Bartlet shows up, drenched, walks out in front of the world's media like a heroic figure battling the very elements themselves, and commences his re-election campaign.

I hadn't made the link before but, now that I think about, I am certain that is exactly how Sunak and his advisors thought he was going to look on the TV news that night! We all spent all that time joking about how this man who claimed to have 'a plan' couldn't even rustle up an umbrella in a rainstorm - but the lack of an umbrella was deliberate! Oh dear god, the poor man thought that was his Jed Bartlet moment!