There was an election, both parties said this Act was going to happen.
It depends what you mean by government but elected officials in the UK are almost completely irrelevant in this (and in most other things, their job is to get in front of a TV camera say how appalled they are that it has happened, no-one could have foreseen this, don't look back in anger, and that they are going to select from the same policy options that the Civil Service presented the last government with...which results in the same conclusion: more civil servants, more regulation, more corruption).
Ofcom has been making a massive power grab, this bill and other recent regulations are granting them massive new powers, and the UK has a system in which ministers have no functional capacity to block this.
Oh give over. This is politician led. If you think this is some civil servant's unilateral wet dream you have a serious misunderstanding of how the UK government and the civil service work. You would do better reading up on these institutions than blaming all the countries ill's on some nebulous idea of "Civil Servants as Illuminati".
I would read more about the new powers that Ofcom has...the type of person who bloviates online about everyone else being stupid tends not to have actually checked what is going on.
Also, none of these laws are led by politicians. All the communications-related offences were led by security services. Do you know when Molly actually passed? 2017? And you are telling me that a law passed in 2025 is related? A law which largely contains things unrelated to her passing (i.e. significant expansion of Ofcom powers).
It is genuinely funny that people who have no idea about politics...as in first-hand knowledge which will just imagine that everything works the way they assume it must work. At the very least, you should exercise some common sense: we have seen multiple Home Office ministers pass through, ministers are gaining no new extra powers, Ofcom staffing has gone up by thousands, the amount of graft that has already gone on is staggering...but the one's to blame are, conveniently, the ones who are always blamed...but seem to be strangely unable to do anything...you cannot possibly be this credulous.
I’m afraid this is nonsense. Elected officials aren’t irrelevant. The majority of them support this legislation and that is why it got enough votes to become law. You don’t have to like it (I’m not a huge fan either), but it’s a perfectly straightforward case of a popular policy becoming law via the democratic process. A process that’s notoriously imperfect and not guaranteed to yield the best outcome in all cases.
Don’t fall into the trap of thinking that this law must have come about by sinister machinations just because you don’t think it’s a good law.
The reason I think this is because: 1. I know this first-hand and 2. You have to be completely blind to not see the same thing happen multiple times with multiple laws (this has been happening for decades).
Elected officials are irrelevant because, in this case, they are functionally unable to propose a reasonable alternative. Policy options were presented, all of the policy options offered in this case were to empower Ofcom (again, how old are you? are you unable to think of another situation like this: same thing happened with BoE/PRA in 2010, same thing happened with Border Force creation, same thing happened with illegal immigration where the only functional action presented was to increase Home Office staffing, I can go on and on) so what was the alternative?
You also may not understand what is going on here either: this legislation gave Ofcom new statutory powers but what you might not be aware of is that Ofcom has also been granted through non-statutory instruments significant new powers that interlock with this legislation...who voted on that? Again: media campaign by the powers that be, multiple Home Office ministers have been railroaded into this, Ofcom/security services have been granted new powers (the latter by the back door...again, tell me what that has to do with "social media abuse"? nothing).
Finally, elected officials are mostly pawns. The majority of "them" do not know what is in the legislation. They have been told the PM wants "Molly's Law" passed, so it is passed. Some of the scrutiny was laughable...do you understand that the law has a provision that requires tech companies to provide "end-to-end encryption" that the government can break? To their credit, this was questioned by legislators several times...it wasn't removed from the Bill, despite it obviously being unrelated to anything in the Act. Again, how are you this blind? Do you see why elected officials might be irrelevant if you are so blind?
Arguably yes, by not overthrowing the mullahs and taking back control. Of course this is easier said than done, but it's not like revolutions haven't happened before in history.
You can REEEE-search away. The facts show that we are in a general period of cooling, with a possible move North soon.
The rEcEnT sCiEnCe tends to show a spike in correlation with fossil fuel usage. But these studies cant be trusted as they are created by the same people who have a bridge to sell us.
Science studies in the 70s, 80s and some of the 90's showed the opposite. You have to acknowledge this and weight it all up.
Yeah, you're going to get mad but that isn't important.
I get the grid pattern in my eyes which are replicated in cave paintings 10,000 years old.