If forcing ISPs to keep records of all web-browsing and email isn't Orwellian, then I really don't know what is. Are you holding off on calling it Orwellian until you've got exactly the situation Orwell described - a TV with a camera attached that you're required to keep on 24 hours a day by law?
Yes. Otherwise by changing the definition you could call any society 'Orwellian'. If you consider this to be 'Orwellian' now.. then what would you call it if we lose more privacy? Its all very Daily Mail to immediately claim that 'all privacy has gone' before it has even happened.
Please don't put words into my mouth, I never said anything of the kind.
And if you felt this strongly, surely you would never use email for anything private? It is currently very far from 1984, and I don't see it getting that way in my lifetime. It is very easy to post on a forum about it (as I'm doing) but those who are genuinely worried would curb their internet usage and emails, or start a petition. Those who don't do that clearly don't really care that much.
Most people don't have a clue that this is happening. The TV news has had close to zero coverage, the newspapers scant more. Most of the significant parliamentary activity around this went on to the background of the all singing and dancing Brexit show filling the news.
I know about this stuff because I've been keeping an eye on it for years, since the days when the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) was a green paper, so a long time. Back then, it was clear that the Home Office was just going to keep pushing the boundary and grabbing as many surveillance powers as they could. I've spent a lot of time in public meetings, private meetings, industry meetings and even in the pub, talking to the Police, Home Office, Cabinet Office, even spooks (if you meet an 'official' discussing national level policy and they don't have a business card then there's only one group they're likely to be from) and colluding with people from civil society groups, individuals, members of Parliament and the House of Lords. One of whom has since been sidelined from worrying about growing surveillance by being appointed Minister for Brexit. Prior to which he was suing the Government over excessive telephone records retention (DRIPA) but withdrew from the case when he got a ministerial job. The case went on without him but the European Court still found against the UK Government.
Just to be clear, I am not agreeing with the snooper charter here, just that responses should be proportional. Unfortunately we live in a world where it is common for people to see things in 'black and white', so at what point do you go from 'perfect privacy' to 'we are just numbers!' ? And if GCHQ has been gathering this data (and regularly using it against citizens, source?) for years - why now is it a problem? I'm asking for perspective here. If one spent much of their life researching, it could very well lead them to think 'we are all completely controlled!' but within a country of over 50 million people, do you really think you are significant enough for businesses/governments to track your every move? or trawl though massive amounts of NHS data to find out more personal details?
The government have forced, or shortly will force your ISP to keep a record of all your web browsing and all the emails you've sent and received; your telephone provider already keeps a log of your mobile position and all calls received and sent, and a record is kept by the police of your car registration every time it passes an ANPR camera. This is all indisputable fact. If you think that's a proportionate way to treat citizens who are under no suspicion whatsoever and don't think it's appropriate to invoke the word Orwellian until it exactly matches the scenario in 1984 then there is little I think that I could say to convince you.
The risk isn't simply what some theoretic future despotic government will do with all this, it's what your average criminal will do when your ISP or telco has been hacked and they've got all your data to use for identity theft, blackmail, fraud, insider trading, whatever. Data breaches are in the news every day, ransomware is currently running rife, still feel so safe with all that data recorded ready to be stolen?
This isn't about tinfoil hats, it's about practising civic hygiene. If the data isn't there to be abused, then there's no potential for abuse. Back before the 2nd world war, the Dutch government kept (paper) records on the religion of every citizen. There was no real need for this data, somebody just thought it would be helpful to collect. Then the Nazis invaded. Fortunately some seriously brave civil servants set to systematically destroying these records before the Germans could get to them and draw up a list of Jews for 'treatment'. Had these been modern centrally held electronic records they would probably have been stolen ahead of the invasion by either hacking or insider espionage; it's not likely that demographic records like this would have 'military grade' protection.