Direct Democracy Comment
Thanks to Cameron, parents can no longer protect their children
In allowing foreign regimes to store, access and redistribute our children's personal and private communications, David Cameron has taken it upon himself to deny UK parents their right and ability to protect their child's privacy and has therefore made UK children so much more vulnerable to abuse.
Up to 850,000 staff from various intelligence agencies and corporates in the US will do what ever they like with the information that they now have access to because, it would be impossible for David Cameron or anyone to give any meaningful guarantee of data protection and he would have known this so, with such a betrayal, what will prevent any of these people from potentially selling our children's personal information to criminal networks that would seek to exploit it?
Where is our guarantee that our children will not one day receive a blackmail threat regarding their private communications? Where is our guarantee that our children will not be penalised by potential employers because of something they did at school one day? Are our children now criminals simply because they expected a right to privacy [as Theresa May suggests]?
An already-vulnerable young girl sends an email, sends an sms or makes a phone call to her trusted friend where she explains about her experience of being abused. The nature of her communication is private and personal and is NOT criminal but on top of her abuse, she will now be dealing with the knowledge that her 'private' [and non-criminal] communication will be seen by up to 850,000 strangers in the US.
A further concern we have regards the implications of vulnerable children now knowing that so-called 'anonymous' help lines have been recording their telephone conversations [content] along with their telephone numbers [meta data], making them personally identifiable. From this point onwards, how can any vulnerable child ever trust in such services and, how can any parent ever trust in so-called 'representative' politics?
Add to this, that the NSPCC estimates that David Cameron reduced the budget for children's social care by 24% [Apr. 2011] and, that Community Care magazine's own survey concludes that "Social workers are effectively being pressurised to ignore child abuse as a result of budget cuts." then David Cameron himself is responsible for the proliferation of child abuse. We say this because it is known that direct cuts to this particular budget do result in increased and prolonged exposure to abuse and both David Cameron and George Osborne would have been aware of this before making the decision [even if only through advice from policy aids].
Further to this, we add that David Cameron is also proliferating child abuse by allowing the law on child protection in schools to discriminate against Muslim children - leaving them vulnerable to abuse from teachers where non-Muslim children aren't and, by leaving children open to abuses of privacy and dignity within school.
Put simply, exposing our children's private communications to 3rd parties and implementing both of these policies whilst reducing budgets that are in place to protect children from abuse, can only increase the proliferation of child abuse and, David Cameron himself is directly responsible for these policies being in-place.
The UK is also still falling well-short of its obligations under the UN CRC and so with all of this in mind, the ONLY way that parents can protect their children is to vote for direct democracy because 'representative' governments have other priorities - like selling-out our children's safety to corrupt totalitarian regimes such as the US government.
• PA direct democracy proposal: Cyber Defence
• PA direct democracy proposal: Enhancement of the right to personal privacy
• PA direct democracy proposals: Law - Family and Child Protection
• PA direct democracy proposals: IT, Communications and Data Protection
We believe that it is the duty of every parent to do their best to protect their children from any threat [regardless of the orientation] and so in our opinion, any parent that fails to take any action to protect their children from David Cameron's mass betrayal is not worthy of parenthood.
We reiterate; David Cameron has removed your right and ability to protect your child without your knowledge or concent. It's your child, it's your vote - vote for the people becoming the government so that we can try to limit the dangers David Cameron has exposed our children to as soon as possible.
In addition, solicitors, counsellors and many other professionals can no longer offer data protection or confidentiality but, if voters aren't bothered then their elected representatives won't bother pandering to them about it.
Voting for direct democracy outside a general election
It is up to us, the people [not the politicians] to use the power that we have always had, to choose to implement direct democracy as soon as possible.
This is not a protest campaign.
In accordance with Magna Carta Article 61 and with UN UDHR Article 21 and with all democratic principals up-held by the UN [which the UK is signed-up to], the People's Administration's Direct Democracy Twitter blog is a UN-sanctioned and legally recognised voting format for UK reform to direct democracy - even outside a general election.
Vote legitimately for a peaceful and structured UK reform to direct democracy now simply by following the People's Administration's Direct Democracy Twitter blog and when numbers reach a point of critical mass, we'll do the rest.
The People's Administration's constitution for reform to direct democracy and our voting protocols for implementing direct democracy have both been accepted by the UK Electoral Commission and the UN as legitimate. In a general election, the People's Administration DOES NOT have to field candidates to secure your vote on the ballot paper. Outside a general election, you can vote for a legitimate reform to direct democracy now by following @self_rule