I am from the side of the debate on surveillance that supports intelligence interrupting our private messages on phones and the internet. I see the security and safety of citizens to be of utmost importance in the UK and globally. I also believe if you have nothing to hide, why does it matter that people might be able to access your private messages? These people do not know who you are, and therefore as long as you're not causing a danger to anybody else, your private information would go nowhere. Intelligence services like GCHQ in the UK are there to keep us all safe. It is because of the work they do that many terrorist plots are foiled before they manage to carry out violent acts. I therefore am all in support of the work they do, and how they do it. If you have nothing to hide, why should it matter?

No, I really don't think so. Intelligence services can use the information for their own ends, or interpret them certain ways. We have a right to basic privacy. We should be able to discuss things without fear of being intercepted.

Security services frequently cite the present threat of terrorist attacks as justification for being able to snoop on private emails. Although terrorism makes international headlines, it does seem to provoke a disproportionate response - what is aptly described as a 'knee jerk' reaction. That is not to triviliase the potential these events have for causing death and destruction, but perspective is required.

A lone gunman, bomber or even vehicle hijacker taking several innocent lives is a horrendous symptom of our politically-troubled times. Yet figures for domestic murders in England and Wales perpetrated by knife or gun-wielding individuals spiked again in 2015 after a decade of falling statistics. 574 people died violently at the hands of non-terrorists.

The extent to which groups like ISIS operate an international web of terror is distorted by their sophisticated propoganda machine, and the fact that whenever any deluded maniac commits an atrocity, by shouting Islamist slogans a random street crime mutates into something far more sinister.

As for whether or not the security services should tap into private messages, the cost to the taxpayer for what is essentially a sledgehammer being used to crack a nut also seems disproportionate. If terror groups know there is any danger of their communications being monitored, there is every likelihood they will utilise encryption, or codes. As much of the recent 'terrorism' has been perpetrated by so-called lone wolves, there would be nothing to eavesdrop on anyway.