FREEDOM AND PRIVACY
SIR,—In his article 'For "Freedom" Read "Privacy"' (Spectator, June 5) Mr. Fairlie seems to confuse two themes. His point that our modern social system displays a growing tendency to impinge on individual privacy may be accepted, although its inevitability in an increasingly complex society is certain. How- ever, the second point, that the Conservatives should fight Labour on the issue of privacy, seems to be inadequately argued. In his four examples of invasions of privacy, three (parking meters, income tax, land tenure) relate to established Conservative practice, leaving only the grossly over-simplified reference to the Labour public school policy to support his statements.
Presumably other examples would be land nationalisation (infringing the freedom of the land speculator to hold the nation to ransom) or a heaVier capital gains tax. We do not know. All Mr.. Fairlie
does is to assert the moral indefensibility of the Labour programme; he leaves the thesis that Labour government would seriously affect individual 'freedom' or 'privacy' entirely unsupported by
argument. I. F. macx INNON Brasenose College, Oxford
Previous page
