Pirate, Facebook, Twitter etc have been monitored and interrogated by potential employers for years ... this is just the government jumping onto that same old bandwagen!

two words for this lot evil and tw*ts  Some should be jailed for genocide 

http://www.independent.co.uk/l...t-mean-a7436251.html

The full list of agencies that can now ask for UK citizens’ browsing history, which is laid out in Schedule 4 of the Bill and was collected by Chris Yiu, is below:

• Metropolitan Police Service
• City of London Police
• Police forces maintained under section 2 of the Police Act 1996
• Police Service of Scotland
• Police Service of Northern Ireland
• British Transport Police
• Ministry of Defence Police
• Royal Navy Police
• Royal Military Police
• Royal Air Force Police
• Security Service
• Secret Intelligence Service
• GCHQ
• Ministry of Defence
• Department of Health
• Home Office
• Ministry of Justice
• National Crime Agency
• HM Revenue & Customs
• Department for Transport
• Department for Work and Pensions
• NHS trusts and foundation trusts in England that provide ambulance services
• Common Services Agency for the Scottish Health Service
• Competition and Markets Authority
• Criminal Cases Review Commission
• Department for Communities in Northern Ireland
• Department for the Economy in Northern Ireland
• Department of Justice in Northern Ireland
• Financial Conduct Authority
• Fire and rescue authorities under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004
• Food Standards Agency
• Food Standards Scotland
• Gambling Commission
• Gangmasters and Labour Abuse Authority
• Health and Safety Executive
• Independent Police Complaints Commissioner
• Information Commissioner
• NHS Business Services Authority
• Northern Ireland Ambulance Service Health and Social Care Trust
• Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service Board
• Northern Ireland Health and Social Care Regional Business Services Organisation
• Office of Communications
• Office of the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland
• Police Investigations and Review Commissioner
• Scottish Ambulance Service Board
• Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission
• Serious Fraud Office
• Welsh Ambulance Services National Health Service Trust

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/173199 - petition to try and stop it

They may be able to ask for a browsing history, but if one does not exist then you cannot be expected to it over.

If you feel strongly about this then there are counter measures you can take, these require some work, but if you really are dead set on keeping your on-line life private you can do it.

Remember, if your computer, tablet or mobile device is siezed and examined by either a police force or private forensic agency, they have the tools to retrieve your on line activity regardless of whether you use in private browsing or delete your browsing history.

Although the information which internet providers will have to have will identify that your device accessed a specific website at a specified time , the records will not show what web pages on that site you looked at or what you did on that website.

Local councils will not be permitted access to the information.

The petition that Jenstar links to above has reached the 100,000 level so it will be considered for parliamentary debate. That doesn't mean that it will get a debate though as the bill has cleared the various stages through the Commons and the Lords and is just waiting for Royal Assent to become law.

How far back into your browsing history can they go?

Nothing to hide - they can view the lot of mine . . . although that in itself might be enough to scupper me chances 

Saint posted:

How far back into your browsing history can they go?

 

Nothing to hide - they can view the lot of mine . . . although that in itself might be enough to scupper me chances 

*Suddenly Saint hears a knock at the door*

I'm innocent I tell thee !!!

Although I did read a piece on the suicide of a controversial photographer David Hamilton recently, never heard of him so I Googled him and he was famous for taking pics of semi-nude teens!!!

I had no idea!! Utterly gob-smacked

See what can innocently happen

Saint posted:

I'm innocent I tell thee !!!

Although I did read a piece on the suicide of a controversial photographer David Hamilton recently, never heard of him so I Googled him and he was famous for taking pics of semi-nude teens!!!

I had no idea!! Utterly gob-smacked

 

See what can innocently happen

A friend mentioned that to me just this week. I have not Googled it but his explanation of the situation was quite detailed.

I was amazed he was ever allowed to do such photography or that it even existed. How did he ever get away with it?

I'd never heard of him until his suicide was announced - think it was The Mail.

He'd had allegations of abuse made about him.

And now it's in my browsing history - innocently I may add.

I can understand why browsing history may be of interest for security reasons ... but its not justified to be as wide spread as described above.

Saint posted:

I was amazed he was ever allowed to do such photography or that it even existed. How did he ever get away with it?

I'd never heard of him until his suicide was announced - think it was The Mail.

He'd had allegations of abuse made about him.

And now it's in my browsing history - innocently I may add.

I can understand why browsing history may be of interest for security reasons ... but its not justified to be as wide spread as described above.

I think mainly because it was a different time.

I don't think you would ever be targeted or accused of anything just for having read an article or even Googled the person in question.

Even if you took an interest in explosives you would need to add more hard evidence before you got a knock on the door, you would at least need to start purchasing items which could be used for that purpose and also be on the 'radar'.  Unless you were all over forums and social media talking about it and asking questions...

Yeah - I hope there is strict guidance about what type of browsing is of importance. Not for me but for common sense and common good.

 

I can understand why browsing history may be of interest for security reasons ... 

Me too.. but can't for the life of me work out why the Food Standards Agency should have access? 

Kaffs posted:

 

I can understand why browsing history may be of interest for security reasons ... 

Me too.. but can't for the life of me work out why the Food Standards Agency should have access? 

Possibly when investigating threats to food production, processing, animal husbandry or threats that may come from any attack to the food chain or the environment affecting it.

Gosh that's tenuous EC (not a criticism - an observation)

An argument can be made to scrutinise anything in that case

It's setting a dangerous precedent

oddly-mp's are exempt from having any agency 'snooping' on them

pirate1111 posted:

oddly-mp's are exempt from having any agency 'snooping' on them

They'll get 'found out' the way they normally do