Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP - Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee, UK HARDtalk


Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP - Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee, UK

Similar Content

Browse content similar to Sir Malcolm Rifkind MP - Chairman of the Intelligence and Security Committee, UK. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!

Transcript


LineFromTo

Thanks to Edward Snowden, America's cyber spy turned later we know US

:00:12.:00:19.

intelligence agencies that by the British secretly monitor electronic

:00:20.:00:25.

communications on of the world. In Britain his revelations prompted a

:00:26.:00:27.

ferocious argument between self-styled spenders -- defenders of

:00:28.:00:32.

liberty and pillars of the security establishment. My guest is a mark on

:00:33.:00:37.

Rifkind, chairman of the UK Parliament's intelligence and

:00:38.:00:43.

security committee. Is this security stage a potential threat to those it

:00:44.:00:46.

is supposed to protect? Welcome to the programme. When those

:00:47.:01:20.

revelations appeared in the Guardian newspaper based upon leaks from

:01:21.:01:23.

Edward Snowden, all about the pervasive electronic surveillance

:01:24.:01:27.

won by US intelligence backed by British intelligence as well, were

:01:28.:01:35.

you surprised? First of all, we have intelligence agencies in Britain,

:01:36.:01:39.

Russia, Germany, France, have intelligence agencies to do

:01:40.:01:43.

intelligence, get secret information others wouldn't wish you to see.

:01:44.:01:46.

Against that background one is not to be surprised the intelligence

:01:47.:01:50.

agencies are doing what we pay them for. Where you being told for the

:01:51.:01:54.

first time or did you know this incredibly extensive electronic

:01:55.:01:58.

eavesdropping, monitoring, intelligence was taking place? The

:01:59.:02:02.

technology is constantly changing. Our primary purpose as an

:02:03.:02:06.

intelligence oversight committee is to satisfy ourselves that Britain's

:02:07.:02:11.

intelligence agencies Bestival are keeping the law, secondly are

:02:12.:02:14.

behaving in a responsible and acceptable fashion, and thirdly

:02:15.:02:17.

helping protect the people of the United Kingdom and through our

:02:18.:02:23.

alliances of other countries. Those are your duties. The technical

:02:24.:02:33.

way in which they do it is not, we are not involved in the technical

:02:34.:02:37.

way. If you are asking me, did we know that very large amounts of

:02:38.:02:40.

information can be processed by modern computers and in order for

:02:41.:02:44.

them to select the various needles in a haystack that might point you

:02:45.:02:49.

towards terrorists or serious, Norse, of course we were aware of

:02:50.:02:55.

that. If I may say so you are a lawyer and a man who has a renowned

:02:56.:02:58.

reputation for passing his words very carefully. You just said we

:02:59.:03:03.

knew they could do that. They have the capability, but did you know

:03:04.:03:07.

they were actually doing it as a result hundreds millions of citizens

:03:08.:03:11.

around the world were in effect having their communications

:03:12.:03:15.

monitored by the National Security agency in the United States, and by

:03:16.:03:22.

GCHQ in the UK? I am perfectly happy to say while we did not address the

:03:23.:03:27.

technical way in which it was done, or the precise technology evolves,

:03:28.:03:31.

we were certainly aware, as were quite a number of people, that it is

:03:32.:03:35.

possible with modern technology and if it is possible the likelihood

:03:36.:03:39.

intelligence agencies carry out what is for them their duty, to use the

:03:40.:03:45.

best possible technology to fight terrorists, prevent terrorist

:03:46.:03:48.

incidents or help the police catch terrorists is something has

:03:49.:03:52.

happened. Forgive me if I don't go beyond that. As a member of the

:03:53.:03:57.

intelligence and Security committee we received secret information. I am

:03:58.:04:00.

not at liberty to share with you the secret information we have received.

:04:01.:04:05.

But you are at liberty to decide and use your judgement to come to a few

:04:06.:04:11.

as to what the public needs to know that was a gritty agencies are

:04:12.:04:16.

doing? This is not the case, on this particular point, the public had

:04:17.:04:22.

every right to know in general the US and UK intelligence and spy

:04:23.:04:27.

agencies were now monitoring their communication. If there is where

:04:28.:04:42.

could monitor it to all systems of course there would be no

:04:43.:04:44.

justification for not disclosing all the information you are referring

:04:45.:04:55.

to. The problem is that you cannot disclose information to the British

:04:56.:04:58.

public without it becoming available to everyone else on the terrorists

:04:59.:05:02.

we are dealing with, the whole of the British public are the

:05:03.:05:08.

terrorists are pretty dumb and silly and foolish, some are incredibly

:05:09.:05:13.

smart. Modern terrorists, because the problem is global terrorism, had

:05:14.:05:17.

a global terrorists communicate? Globally, which means e-mails, phone

:05:18.:05:21.

communication, social messaging and all the other options available stop

:05:22.:05:25.

unless the intelligence agencies can beat them at their own game we do

:05:26.:05:28.

not discover the terrorists until after they have killed many innocent

:05:29.:05:35.

people. Do you believe is the leaks that came from Edward Snowden did

:05:36.:05:45.

anything to jeopardise the security of the British people or any

:05:46.:05:52.

security operation. We know is snowed in and stole tens of

:05:53.:05:55.

thousands of secret documents. We don't know how many. He has never

:05:56.:06:01.

disclosed that. He may have some have not yet arrived in the Guardian

:06:02.:06:08.

or the New York Times. I've no doubt many documents marks ago, if they

:06:09.:06:10.

did appear the public domain, wouldn't do any drastic damage. I am

:06:11.:06:15.

equally clear there are at of a lot that would do tremendous damage. The

:06:16.:06:21.

people at the moment you are deciding which of the stolen

:06:22.:06:25.

documents appear or a mixture of Edward Snowden and various newspaper

:06:26.:06:31.

editors. Neither of whom are qualified to make their judgement.

:06:32.:06:37.

When Andrew Parker said the other day they gave the fanatics the

:06:38.:06:40.

ability to evade intelligence agencies, and when the former head

:06:41.:06:48.

of GCHQ said this was the most catastrophic loss to British

:06:49.:06:57.

intelligence ever, I couldn't see one jot of specific evidence to back

:06:58.:07:03.

up those claims. Let me try and help you and those interested. There were

:07:04.:07:07.

allegations last week in the press I'm not commenting on whether they

:07:08.:07:10.

would chew or not, that the intelligence agencies are able to

:07:11.:07:14.

deal with encrypted material and find out what it really means. If

:07:15.:07:23.

these allegations were correct, every terrorist becoming aware of

:07:24.:07:30.

this immediately knows that material they are sending which they might

:07:31.:07:33.

think is secure because it is encrypted actually may still be able

:07:34.:07:38.

to be inspected. Maybe you are behind the curve on this.

:07:39.:07:44.

Specialists in court geography -- geography, the argument exposing

:07:45.:07:57.

these documents, a category can be hacked, the so-called back door.

:07:58.:08:03.

There are doubles -- many levels of encryption. He says the argument of

:08:04.:08:08.

exposing the documents helps the terrorists doesn't pass the laugh

:08:09.:08:14.

test. You say I am supposed to accept his view, at the same time

:08:15.:08:20.

you are quoting Andrew Parker who spent a lifetime dealing with

:08:21.:08:26.

intelligence. They are so close to the centres of power they have a

:08:27.:08:29.

clear vested interest in maintaining the secrecy that black power wants

:08:30.:08:35.

to retain. He is an independent expert and if he says you believe

:08:36.:08:39.

the terrorist stoked already assume even that they could messages can be

:08:40.:08:46.

hacked into view are joking. Terrorists know as do general public

:08:47.:08:52.

know some matters can be hacked into but they do not know what level of

:08:53.:08:55.

sophistication exist. If they are told and if they believe allegations

:08:56.:09:00.

that the levels of encryption that can be entered into a more

:09:01.:09:02.

sophisticated than the previously understood, inevitably that has

:09:03.:09:10.

consequences. The Guardian newspaper was very careful not to give that

:09:11.:09:13.

level of detail. Is a process by which independent experts reported

:09:14.:09:18.

and they sifted through everything republished to make sure they could

:09:19.:09:25.

not jeopardise security. This shows a level of naivete I find

:09:26.:09:27.

staggering. The idea that a newspaper editor in good faith and

:09:28.:09:32.

various other riders -- advisers should be up to judge all the

:09:33.:09:35.

material is not top-secret that somehow they are in the position to

:09:36.:09:39.

know whether terrorists or criminals would benefit from publishing it in

:09:40.:09:43.

the newspapers, if they believe that they are naive. This comes down to a

:09:44.:09:49.

question of trust. The public has to decide who they can trust when it

:09:50.:09:54.

comes to his documents, coming only rely upon the word of the

:09:55.:09:58.

intelligence agency chiefs who say this has to be kept secret, do they

:09:59.:10:01.

rely on the word of politicians such as yourself who to a certain extent

:10:02.:10:05.

or able to see top-secret and confidential information and act as

:10:06.:10:10.

tribunes of the people but not tell them what they have seen, or do they

:10:11.:10:15.

in the end has to rely on information gatherers such as the

:10:16.:10:19.

media who tell the public more than anybody else will about what is

:10:20.:10:29.

going on. There is a real public debate on the balance between

:10:30.:10:33.

security and privacy. The beginning of that debate is not Snowdon, it is

:10:34.:10:38.

in a dogma Chrissy, do we believe even in a democracy, free society,

:10:39.:10:42.

it is necessary in a modern world to have secrets about secret

:10:43.:10:50.

intelligence agencies. Secret intelligence agencies must remain

:10:51.:10:53.

able to have information that is secret. And not to put a branded

:10:54.:11:05.

secrecy over anything? There isn't a blanket of secrecy. 30s get this

:11:06.:11:10.

country didn't admit that MI6 existed, you didn't know where the

:11:11.:11:15.

pretty fun. Not only do they exist, they operate under a legal framework

:11:16.:11:19.

of oversight and constraints that does not exist in Russia or China.

:11:20.:11:24.

One of the great ironies that Mr Snowden in the name of freedom,

:11:25.:11:29.

Festa goes to China and then he goes to Russia. In both these countries

:11:30.:11:34.

the intelligence agencies they have are there primarily, I have got to

:11:35.:11:40.

make this point, are there to suppress political dissent, prevent

:11:41.:11:43.

what we would call legitimate opposition to government. But they

:11:44.:11:47.

don't have any oversight system and I would response the same way in the

:11:48.:11:51.

Western democracies hold ourselves to a higher standard. That is what

:11:52.:11:57.

our politicians do. That is the point I am making. We not only have

:11:58.:12:02.

ministerial accountability which people might say that is not good

:12:03.:12:08.

enough, we have the intelligence security which are all party,

:12:09.:12:11.

bipartisan, no party divided the committee, I just think my own

:12:12.:12:18.

views, on behalf of nine members of parliament, Labour, Conservative,

:12:19.:12:20.

Liberal Democrat, in addition to that we have judges who are

:12:21.:12:24.

intelligence commissioners who are able to scrutinise every warrant the

:12:25.:12:29.

Secretary of State signs to make sure it was done properly and for

:12:30.:12:33.

the right person and we are used for which it was intended. None of these

:12:34.:12:38.

safeguards exist in authoritarian societies and it is against that

:12:39.:12:41.

background your initial question about trust, what is the level of

:12:42.:12:46.

trust has to take into account we are a democratic society, where

:12:47.:12:51.

newspapers do indeed report allegations of alleged abuse by

:12:52.:12:54.

intelligence agencies in the way they don't do in Moscow or Beijing.

:12:55.:13:02.

We know for a fact in the past hour and British intelligence services

:13:03.:13:05.

have abuse their powers. They have used their powers to so veiled

:13:06.:13:13.

political movements which was... I'm going back to the 1980s. Much more

:13:14.:13:17.

recently we have had in the United States I am loosely lumping the UK

:13:18.:13:23.

and the United States together, a director of intelligence and the

:13:24.:13:30.

United States, Congress he was not surveilling... He told a lie. We now

:13:31.:13:35.

know that top officials in intelligence lies. Politicians as

:13:36.:13:46.

well. Politicians are sometimes very strong vested interest in

:13:47.:13:50.

maintaining the status quo. Jack Straw, the Labour Party, senior

:13:51.:13:55.

figure, he was Home Secretary and Foreign Secretary, he has said he

:13:56.:13:59.

now knows because the intelligence services have said so, he was

:14:00.:14:07.

monitored, spied upon by the intelligence services, his own

:14:08.:14:11.

family was investigated, his sexual proclivities were investigated, and

:14:12.:14:14.

he says he finds that neither surprising nor shocking. We need

:14:15.:14:18.

politicians who would find that both surprising and shocking and

:14:19.:14:26.

unacceptable. I am interested at all the examples you have given given

:14:27.:14:47.

were before legislation was introduced for the first time giving

:14:48.:14:50.

statutory control over our intelligence agencies. Until the

:14:51.:14:54.

1990s, 1990s, until then, the intelligence agencies operated under

:14:55.:14:57.

authority from the Secretary of State. There was no legal basis on

:14:58.:15:13.

which they operated. Operated. Now there is an act of Parliament which

:15:14.:15:17.

says what the law is is to what they can do, the authority they require

:15:18.:15:21.

to proceed, and when they will be committing a criminal offence if

:15:22.:15:24.

they do not go by that. Since then judicial commissioners,

:15:25.:15:26.

commissioners, and other commissions have been established in the past 20

:15:27.:15:30.

or 30 years. Since the events you mention. I bet you cannot give a

:15:31.:15:33.

single example since then of political interference in the United

:15:34.:15:36.

Kingdom interfering with Ordinariate British citizens going about their

:15:37.:15:39.

business because of their alleged political views or other

:15:40.:15:41.

proclivities. There may have been abuses in the 1960s, 70s, and 80s

:15:42.:15:45.

when there were no legal frameworks. What I can point to, and this comes

:15:46.:15:48.

from politicians on your own site, like David Davis, saying that that

:15:49.:15:52.

the legislation as it stands, as you say it was passed in the 1990s,

:15:53.:15:56.

1990s, he says that it is incapable of protecting citizens from this new

:15:57.:15:58.

brand of pervasive digital surveillance. I have read what he

:15:59.:16:05.

has said and what he speaks about. The Intelligence and Security

:16:06.:16:08.

Committee which I chair has had its powers, powers, its budget, its

:16:09.:16:13.

resources doubled... Your budget is over ?1 million. For years it was

:16:14.:16:23.

six or ?700,000. A spit in the bucket, if I may say so compared

:16:24.:16:27.

with the task that that faces you in monitoring the fast changing world

:16:28.:16:30.

of electronic and digital surveillance. Apart from the United

:16:31.:16:38.

States, which is in a league of its own, we have more resources and

:16:39.:16:41.

manpower dealing with intelligence agencies than any other country in

:16:42.:16:51.

the world. Secondly, in the last year, Parliament has agreed that

:16:52.:16:55.

that for the first time in history, we will have the power to require

:16:56.:16:58.

the intelligence agencies to provide as with the information we need. Up

:16:59.:17:02.

until now it has been voluntary on their part. Now they are required.

:17:03.:17:04.

Only the Prime Minister and Secretary of State can stop us and

:17:05.:17:08.

they have to justify it, it would have to be exceptional

:17:09.:17:11.

circumstances. For the first time Parliament has given the

:17:12.:17:13.

intelligence committee oversight of the intelligence operation

:17:14.:17:20.

committees. In the last couple of weeks, weeks, our staff, who are not

:17:21.:17:23.

employed by the intelligence agencies, agencies, have got into

:17:24.:17:26.

the intelligence agencies and have had access to some of their most

:17:27.:17:29.

secret files to ensure that when we are carrying out investigations we

:17:30.:17:33.

will see not just what the agencies choose to show us but what we deem

:17:34.:17:43.

to be relevant to our enquiry. It has never happened before. Never

:17:44.:17:46.

before have they had people not their own stuff going into their

:17:47.:18:01.

offices and seeing their files. In a few weeks will have the first ever

:18:02.:18:04.

public session of taking evidence from the intelligence agencies, the

:18:05.:18:07.

heads of MI6, MI5, GCHQ, will be taking evidence from the committee.

:18:08.:18:10.

A couple of quick questions. Before we end this phase, has what we have

:18:11.:18:14.

learned from Edward Snowden in any way changed the degree of trust you

:18:15.:18:18.

are prepared to put in the intelligence services? No. Not at

:18:19.:18:27.

all? I will give you a quick answer. The allegations in this country was

:18:28.:18:30.

that the GCHQ was circumventing the law by using the NSA rather than

:18:31.:18:33.

going through a British legal procedure. It was investigation we

:18:34.:18:38.

found out it was an unjustified allegation. It is whether it is the

:18:39.:18:45.

law itself can be usefully looked at from time to time to see whether it

:18:46.:18:49.

is keeping up to date with modern technology. The intelligent security

:18:50.:18:54.

committee has said publicly that is part of the Work Programme we are

:18:55.:18:58.

looking and will continue to look at the legal basis under which the

:18:59.:19:04.

agencies operate. There is the difference between the agencies

:19:05.:19:06.

acting legally and with full integrity under the law they have

:19:07.:19:10.

been told as law and whether that law itself can be looked at to see

:19:11.:19:14.

whether improvements may be needed. A final point, point, will there be,

:19:15.:19:19.

as a result of what we have learnt, new and tougher legislation in this

:19:20.:19:26.

area to ensure tighter oversight? That is for the government, not my

:19:27.:19:30.

committee. Do you believe there is now a need for new legislation? We

:19:31.:19:35.

are going to see whether that might be... I want to know your personal

:19:36.:19:45.

opinion. I'm sorry, until we carry out the work I do not tell you that.

:19:46.:19:52.

You were very confident of the way in which Britain is still seen

:19:53.:19:55.

around the world as a paragon of creed and transparency... Those were

:19:56.:20:01.

your words. As said as a matter of fact oversight structures and powers

:20:02.:20:04.

are broadly similar to the United States and more substantial than any

:20:05.:20:11.

other country in the world. In the course of these revelations some

:20:12.:20:13.

specific detail came out about surveillance of foreign nations by

:20:14.:20:17.

the US and the UK. GCHQ was behind spying on the Turkish finance and is

:20:18.:20:26.

to in preparation free G20 meeting. The Turkish Prime Minister said that

:20:27.:20:29.

it is going to be scandalous to the United Kingdom at a time when

:20:30.:20:32.

international cooperation, more than ever, depends on mutual trust. These

:20:33.:20:35.

revelations have been damaging for Britain's international standing. I

:20:36.:20:41.

would point out that Turkey has very impressive intelligence agencies.

:20:42.:20:44.

You must come during conclusion whether these occasionally spy on

:20:45.:20:52.

some of their neighbours. What do you think? I am going to continue

:20:53.:20:57.

the thought about Turkey by switching to Syria. One key area is

:20:58.:21:07.

Syria. You sit on the Security intelligence committee. You listen

:21:08.:21:21.

closely to the debate about Syria. You participate in it. You have

:21:22.:21:26.

called for the arming of the Syrian rebels and for military intervention

:21:27.:21:29.

during that some discussion in Washington and London. London. Do

:21:30.:21:34.

you know except, as we see things unfold in Syria, both of those

:21:35.:21:37.

things military intervention and proactive arming of the rebels would

:21:38.:21:40.

have been a mistake? I do not. The circumstances are different to what

:21:41.:21:44.

they were 1.5 years ago. One of the reasons I came to the idea that

:21:45.:21:47.

military assistance was essential was because one saw the jihadi

:21:48.:21:50.

terrorists becoming more and more powerful. This last summer you are

:21:51.:21:53.

still arguing for arming the rebels... Precisely. They are

:21:54.:22:00.

becoming more and more influential. The Free Syrian Army said the

:22:01.:22:04.

Islamist are still taking over and you still want to send arms. The

:22:05.:22:12.

Free Syrian Army did not say that. This point I'm seeking to put across

:22:13.:22:16.

to you is that if you want a moderate secular opposition to

:22:17.:22:19.

become the future government of Syria, then we are in an impossible

:22:20.:22:22.

situation that has become worse where the Assad regime has all the

:22:23.:22:25.

weapons it could want from Russia and Iran and the jihadi terrorists

:22:26.:22:28.

are are getting from their sympathisers in in parts of the

:22:29.:22:35.

world. He said soon there would be no FSA, the Islamic groups a

:22:36.:22:39.

takeover. The change has been in that direction. You now saying

:22:40.:22:51.

saying it is too late? That your previous stance was the right and

:22:52.:23:01.

just thing to do cannot now happen. I am saying that the war in Syria

:23:02.:23:05.

will only come to an end when both sides know they cannot win

:23:06.:23:17.

militarily. Assad because the weapons he has been getting from

:23:18.:23:21.

Iran and Russia and because the help eager has polite has believed he has

:23:22.:23:25.

been been on a roll. He thinks he can win militarily. I think it is is

:23:26.:23:28.

important that the modern Syrian opposition opposition be given the

:23:29.:23:31.

tools with which which to defend their communities and and force

:23:32.:23:38.

Assad to the negotiating table. Table. Given the intelligence

:23:39.:23:42.

estimates we hear and the head of MI5 in the UK said recently hundreds

:23:43.:23:45.

of of fighters, he believes, areleaving to fight in the Syria,

:23:46.:23:49.

and they represent a real threat to Britain. You still think even in

:23:50.:23:56.

that context with that radicalisation that sending arms to

:23:57.:23:59.

Syria is still a good idea. You cannot cannot guarantee where those

:24:00.:24:07.

arms will end up. The people who do not have decent arms are the Syrian

:24:08.:24:15.

moderate opposition. The idea that if if you provide them with the

:24:16.:24:18.

equipment they need they will hand them over to their sworn enemies,

:24:19.:24:22.

the the jihadi terrorists, who are massively massively over, is quite

:24:23.:24:34.

unrealistic. . Thank you very much indeed.

:24:35.:24:41.

Download Subtitles

SRT

ASS