Olympic Park 2012

The Olympic Act of 2006 came back into the news last week, with a Human Rights story about police powers “to enter private homes and seize political posters during the London 2012 Olympics” from the Daily Mail amongst others.  According to the Guardian, these measures were passed with the intention of preventing “‘overcommercialisation’ of the games” but might be used differently.

The original purpose of the Act (which can be read on the Department for Culture Media and Sport website at http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/pdf/ukpga_20060012_en.pdf ) was to give police powers to enter private homes e.g. to deal with ‘ambush marketing’ materials advertising near to Olympic Venues with the Olympic logo. Press coverage suggests that the Bill is so broad that the powers could be used where terrorism is suspected, and that cival rights groups are worried that the right to protest is also under threat.

I am not sure why this story is back, but it reminded me of news from 2007 about a leaked memo from No.10, when the Telegraph reported that the government was considering using DNA checks, scanning post, CCTV, monitoring oyster cards etc. to fight Olympic 2012 crime. Doubtless we all value our personal freedom and privacy, but if these powers are really necessary, then what is the real threat?