I think the problem is kind of simple in that people in Government come from mostly from two main fields; business and Law. Neither group embraces things that are truly new or innovative, and neither wants the status quo to change. For example, if the Law were written in such a way as to be crystal clear to every citizen, lawyers would make far less money. Ergo, they use Latin and pages-long doubletalk and legalese, which is what they use to write laws when they’re in office. In a truly enlightened society, you would not need a translator to understand the laws that govern daily life, but making laws incomprehensible to read allows room for all sorts of loopholes while at the same time making the politician look like they’re really doing something for the People. Business-types fears losing money as well, and as times change or new technologies come along, they become more and more desperate to hold on to what always worked in the past to bring in the cash. They’d rather spend millions on paying off politicians or becoming politicians themselves in order to roadblock progress than embrace the future or things that would benefit everyone. That’s what killed off the buggy whip manufacturers, not cars. They just didn’t invest enough money in lawyers, lobbyists, or politicians.

Hopefully Mandelson won’t get these plans pushed through but I would like to address the comment about law by Mark S.

Laws are written the way they are to avoid the loopholes. If a statute is written in such a way that it can be interpreted more than one way, then the law loses consistency. One judge could construe the law to mean one thing while another could see it a different way. Each would be basing their decision on the same law but the outcome could be very different.

The law seems complicated on the surface but once you take a decent look at it, then any level headed person can figure out what its saying.

Mandelson just wants to keep all his high powered friends who support him happy. The Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms states in article 6.2 that “Everyone charged with a criminal offence shall be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law”. Even Mandelson can’t override Human rights laws set by the EU.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/feb/17/internet-newzealand

This was an effective protest here in New Zealand, and it actually stopped the law from going ahead, so maybe it can be repeated in the UK.