Browse content similar to 15/03/2016. Check below for episodes and series from the same categories and more!
Line | From | To | |
---|---|---|---|
Myers. -- Mars. I received an update that a signal has been received and | :00:00. | :00:00. | |
we can successfully say that the launch has been a success. Thank | :00:00. | :00:08. | |
you. Order! We come now to the urgent question. Mr Hilary Benn. | :00:09. | :00:19. | |
Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. To ask the Secretary of State for | :00:20. | :00:23. | |
Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will make a statement on the | :00:24. | :00:26. | |
announcement by Russia that it is redeploying the main part of its | :00:27. | :00:29. | |
force from Syria, and the implications of this for the peace | :00:30. | :00:38. | |
process? We have of course seen the media reports of Russian withdrawal | :00:39. | :00:43. | |
of forces, including this morning that the first group of Russian | :00:44. | :00:47. | |
planes have left the airbase to return to Russia. However, I should | :00:48. | :00:51. | |
tell the House that none of the members of the International Syria | :00:52. | :00:56. | |
support group, as far as I have been able to determine, had any advance | :00:57. | :01:00. | |
notice of this Russian announcement, and we are yet to see any detailed | :01:01. | :01:04. | |
plans behind Russia's announcement yesterday. We do not yet have any | :01:05. | :01:09. | |
independent evidence to verify Russia's claims that military | :01:10. | :01:14. | |
withdrawals have already begun. We are monitoring developments closely. | :01:15. | :01:18. | |
It would be important to judge Russia by its actions. It is worth | :01:19. | :01:25. | |
remembering that Russia announced withdrawal of forces in the Ukraine, | :01:26. | :01:31. | |
which later turned out to be routine rotation of forces. So if there's | :01:32. | :01:35. | |
announcement represents a genuine decision by Russia to continue to | :01:36. | :01:39. | |
de-escalate the military conflict, to ensure compliance with the | :01:40. | :01:43. | |
Association of hostilities, and to encourage the Syrian regime and to | :01:44. | :01:47. | |
participate in peace negotiations in good faith, then it would be | :01:48. | :01:52. | |
welcome. Now is the time for all parties to focus on political | :01:53. | :01:54. | |
negotiations, which resumed yesterday in Geneva. Because only a | :01:55. | :02:01. | |
political transition away from Asad's rolled to a Government | :02:02. | :02:07. | |
representative of all Syrians will deliver the peace that Syrians are | :02:08. | :02:13. | |
desperately need. It will give us a Government in Damascus able to focus | :02:14. | :02:17. | |
on defeating terrorism and rebuilding Syria. There can be no | :02:18. | :02:20. | |
peace in Syria while Asad remains in power. Russia has unique influence | :02:21. | :02:28. | |
to help make these negotiations succeed, and we sincerely hope that | :02:29. | :02:33. | |
they will use it. Since it came into force on the 27th of February, the | :02:34. | :02:38. | |
cessation of hostilities has resulted in a significant reduction | :02:39. | :02:43. | |
in violence in Syria. However, there have been a significant number of | :02:44. | :02:47. | |
reports of violations, including the continued use of barrel bombs, which | :02:48. | :02:51. | |
we have been discussing with our partners in the ceasefire task force | :02:52. | :02:58. | |
in Geneva. We have serious concerns that the Assad regime has been using | :02:59. | :03:04. | |
the cessation of hostilities to pursue its military objectives and | :03:05. | :03:08. | |
that it is not serious about political negotiations. Swift action | :03:09. | :03:12. | |
to address these violations is therefore vital to reduce the | :03:13. | :03:18. | |
violence and show the Syrian people, including the Syrian opposition, | :03:19. | :03:22. | |
that both Russia and the Assad regime are abiding by the terms of | :03:23. | :03:28. | |
the cessation of hostilities. Failure to do so threatened the | :03:29. | :03:33. | |
prospects for big continued political negotiations. We look to | :03:34. | :03:37. | |
rush up as guarantor with the regime and its backers to use its unique | :03:38. | :03:41. | |
influence to use compliance and to make very clear to the Assad regime | :03:42. | :03:46. | |
that their expectations, that they must negotiate in good faith. After | :03:47. | :03:51. | |
investing so much an aside, Mr must show the world that he can exercise | :03:52. | :03:58. | |
control over his protege. At the same time, we called for a complete | :03:59. | :04:04. | |
and unfettered humanitarian access across Syria, and an end to all | :04:05. | :04:09. | |
violations of international humanitarian law in accordance with | :04:10. | :04:12. | |
the security council resolution. We are relieved that desperately needed | :04:13. | :04:19. | |
aid convoys are now arriving in some besieged areas in Syria, including | :04:20. | :04:25. | |
some of those named in the Munich ISG agreement. It is imperative that | :04:26. | :04:30. | |
this continues, that in particular access is provided to the town has | :04:31. | :04:42. | |
not seen any aid yet. We must sustain humanitarian access across | :04:43. | :04:45. | |
Syria. Mr Speaker, no one would be more delighted than me if after five | :04:46. | :04:51. | |
months of relentless bombing Russia is genuinely winding down its | :04:52. | :04:54. | |
military support to the brutal Assad regime. But, as in all matters | :04:55. | :05:00. | |
related to Russia, it is the actions, rather than the words, that | :05:01. | :05:05. | |
count. We should be watching carefully over the coming days to | :05:06. | :05:08. | |
see if the potential promise of this announcement turns into reality. And | :05:09. | :05:16. | |
very grateful to the Foreign Secretary for that reply. The | :05:17. | :05:20. | |
conflict in Syria has now raged for five years. Half the population have | :05:21. | :05:24. | |
fled their homes and neighbouring countries have borne the brunt of | :05:25. | :05:28. | |
the refugee crisis and according to the Syrian Observatory, over 360 | :05:29. | :05:35. | |
thousand people have lost their lives, mostly at the hands of | :05:36. | :05:40. | |
President Assad. In the past six months, Russian districts alone have | :05:41. | :05:47. | |
killed 1700 civilians. The withdrawal of Russian forces will be | :05:48. | :05:51. | |
cautiously welcomed by all of us, but I agree with the Foreign | :05:52. | :05:54. | |
Secretary that it needs to be carried through, in particular if it | :05:55. | :05:58. | |
is going to be support the ceasefire. The secretary has told | :05:59. | :06:03. | |
the House that he has not received any direct information about the | :06:04. | :06:06. | |
likely timescale and extent of the withdrawal. Could he however comment | :06:07. | :06:13. | |
on the statement reported and attributed to a Russian defence | :06:14. | :06:16. | |
Minister, who said that Russian forces will continue to attack | :06:17. | :06:20. | |
so-called terrorists, a term that they have used in the past to cover | :06:21. | :06:23. | |
its tracks and the Syrian opposition? Can he tell has what | :06:24. | :06:28. | |
discussions he has had about the Russian Foreign Minister about this? | :06:29. | :06:33. | |
How might this change the type of missions that the RAF and others in | :06:34. | :06:37. | |
the anti Dyas coalition and taking in Syria? Given the latest extent of | :06:38. | :06:47. | |
the ceasefire, what action is the British Government and other | :06:48. | :06:50. | |
Government is proposing to take about this? Does he agree that a | :06:51. | :06:54. | |
full withdrawal would improve the confidence of opposition forces | :06:55. | :06:57. | |
within the ceasefire and help to ensure that their book is | :06:58. | :07:02. | |
participation in the process. What does he think will be the impact of | :07:03. | :07:08. | |
the ceasefire and the withdrawal of the international community to | :07:09. | :07:12. | |
safely provide the humanitarian aid he has referred to, in particular to | :07:13. | :07:15. | |
the towns and areas that have been besieged, given the continuing | :07:16. | :07:21. | |
concerns that the international committee have expressed. Potential | :07:22. | :07:32. | |
war crimes committed by to the council this week, what does he | :07:33. | :07:42. | |
think about any war crimes being committed to the courts? Finally, | :07:43. | :07:45. | |
what discussions has he had with other members of the International | :07:46. | :07:51. | |
Syria support group about the prospects for the latest round of | :07:52. | :07:56. | |
peace talks taking place in Geneva? Does he agree with me that both | :07:57. | :08:00. | |
Russia and Syria needs to ensure that all issues are on the table if | :08:01. | :08:05. | |
the Syrian people are to seek peace and stability finally returned to | :08:06. | :08:14. | |
their war-torn country? I'm grateful to the right honourable gentleman, | :08:15. | :08:18. | |
and as he rightly says, it is now five years since this terrible civil | :08:19. | :08:24. | |
War began and he set out absolutely correctly the scale of attrition | :08:25. | :08:28. | |
that the Syrian people have faced in that time. He referred to the | :08:29. | :08:33. | |
remarks attributed to the defence Minister of Russia saying that | :08:34. | :08:39. | |
Russia would continue to attack terrorists. This is exactly the | :08:40. | :08:43. | |
formula that the Russians have used in the past when attacking the | :08:44. | :08:45. | |
moderate opposition. They have always asserted that they only | :08:46. | :08:51. | |
conduct air strikes against terrorists, so it's not terribly | :08:52. | :08:53. | |
reassuring that if you hours after the announcement of a withdrawal of | :08:54. | :08:59. | |
their military forces, the defence minister as saying that they will | :09:00. | :09:02. | |
continue to attack terrorists. He asked me about discussions with the | :09:03. | :09:09. | |
Foreign Minister of Russia. I have had no such discussions since the | :09:10. | :09:12. | |
announcement was made, although I have spoken to American colleagues | :09:13. | :09:17. | |
to assess what information they have. The UK mission in Syria will | :09:18. | :09:22. | |
not change as a result of withdrawal of Russian forces. UK air strikes | :09:23. | :09:30. | |
are primarily targeted against, exclusively targeted against the | :09:31. | :09:37. | |
east of the country. They will continue to be so targeted. He asked | :09:38. | :09:41. | |
about the latest assessment of the ceasefire. We held a meeting in | :09:42. | :09:45. | |
Paris on Sunday, in which we reviewed the situation on the | :09:46. | :09:51. | |
ground. The reality is that after a lull in the level of air strikes | :09:52. | :09:55. | |
immediately after the cessation of hostilities, they have grown | :09:56. | :10:04. | |
steadily and on March the 10th, we assessed Russian air strike threat | :10:05. | :10:06. | |
the same level as priest as priest decision of hostilities. | :10:07. | :10:22. | |
If Russia carries out a full withdrawal of its forces which I | :10:23. | :10:28. | |
don't think is what even the Russian announcement is suggesting, but if | :10:29. | :10:34. | |
it were to carry out a full withdrawal of forces, that would | :10:35. | :10:37. | |
certainly change the balance of power and military advantage on the | :10:38. | :10:42. | |
ground in a very significant way. With regard to access for | :10:43. | :10:45. | |
humanitarian aid, it is not the Russians that have been impeding | :10:46. | :10:51. | |
access for humanitarian aid, but the Syrian regime. Therefore the | :10:52. | :10:55. | |
question is around how much leveraged the Russians have over the | :10:56. | :10:59. | |
regime, and how much they are prepared to exercise, and one could | :11:00. | :11:02. | |
speculate about whether this announcement is in fact an exercise | :11:03. | :11:08. | |
by Russia in reminding the regime of its position as a client operating | :11:09. | :11:16. | |
at Russia's will. On the International Criminal Court the two | :11:17. | :11:22. | |
major impediments, the first is that Syria is not a signatory to the ICC | :11:23. | :11:27. | |
Convention, the second is that of course Russia holds a veto in the | :11:28. | :11:33. | |
Security Council. So whilst we all seek to bring those responsible for | :11:34. | :11:40. | |
the terrible crimes committed in Syria to justice, I would advise the | :11:41. | :11:43. | |
right honourable gentleman not to hold his breath just for this | :11:44. | :11:55. | |
moment. Finally, the eye S SG hasn't met in ISSG format recently, but we | :11:56. | :11:59. | |
have had opportunities to talk about the agenda for the peace talks at | :12:00. | :12:04. | |
Geneva, we are very satisfied with the approach taken, it is a very | :12:05. | :12:08. | |
sensible approach which recognises that bluntly as soon as we get to | :12:09. | :12:14. | |
the difficult subjects, the talks may run into extreme difficulty, and | :12:15. | :12:20. | |
therefore seeks to begin by discussing some rather less | :12:21. | :12:24. | |
controversial subjects to try to at least generate some momentum before | :12:25. | :12:27. | |
we come to the rather more difficult issues. But I have to say again that | :12:28. | :12:33. | |
the sticking point is transition. We are clear, resolutions of the ISSG | :12:34. | :12:38. | |
are clear, that the way forward has to be through a transitional regime. | :12:39. | :12:42. | |
Which moves us from the current position with Assad in power to a | :12:43. | :12:45. | |
new position with Assad out of power. The Russians, the Syrians, | :12:46. | :12:52. | |
the Iranians, still do not accept that principle, and unless and until | :12:53. | :12:57. | |
it is accepted, the talks going on in Geneva may linger for a while but | :12:58. | :13:01. | |
they will not ultimately be able to make significant progress. | :13:02. | :13:09. | |
Does the Foreign Secretary agree in so far as he refers to Russia | :13:10. | :13:13. | |
sending him a message to -- a message to Assad that this is | :13:14. | :13:16. | |
potentially helpful as far as the peace process is concerned by | :13:17. | :13:19. | |
ensuring that Assad doesn't overplay his hand in the peace talks? But the | :13:20. | :13:25. | |
actual threat to the peace process comes from across the border in | :13:26. | :13:32. | |
Turkey, which is no longer led by a constructive and rational partner in | :13:33. | :13:38. | |
the process, and the actions of the president should be giving all of us | :13:39. | :13:45. | |
the gravest concern as he presides over a disintegrating democracy and | :13:46. | :13:51. | |
a war on part of his own people. It is possible that the Russian | :13:52. | :13:55. | |
announcement is intended as a message to the Assad regime. Don't | :13:56. | :13:59. | |
overplay your hand, get to the negotiating table and engage. It is | :14:00. | :14:06. | |
also possible that it is intended as a message to the moderate opposition | :14:07. | :14:10. | |
that if they do what is expected of them, because it has not been that | :14:11. | :14:15. | |
easy to persuade them to attend the Geneva talks when Russian bombs are | :14:16. | :14:19. | |
still raining down on their positions, then that is all | :14:20. | :14:22. | |
positive. But unfortunately none of us knows what the intent of Mr Putin | :14:23. | :14:28. | |
is when he carries out any action, which is why he is a very difficult | :14:29. | :14:34. | |
partner in any situation. On the question of Turkey, I would just say | :14:35. | :14:39. | |
this. Turkey remains an important Nato ally, and a vital security | :14:40. | :14:46. | |
partner for the UK. And I think when we look at events in Turkey, whilst | :14:47. | :14:53. | |
he can refer as he did to recent legislative changes and actions of | :14:54. | :14:58. | |
the administration, we should also acknowledge the terrible challenge | :14:59. | :15:04. | |
that the Turkish people are facing from terrorism, with multiple deaths | :15:05. | :15:09. | |
on the attack on Sunday in Ankara, hundreds of security force members | :15:10. | :15:13. | |
killed over the last nine months, 100 or so, many more than 100 | :15:14. | :15:19. | |
civilians also dead. So we have got to understand the challenge that | :15:20. | :15:23. | |
Turkey faces, and I would assert as we do in relation to every country, | :15:24. | :15:28. | |
the right of the Turkish people and the Turkish Government to defend | :15:29. | :15:32. | |
themselves against attack, when they face this kind of terrorist attack. | :15:33. | :15:41. | |
It is almost five years to the day since the uprising against a side. | :15:42. | :15:45. | |
11 million displaced, 80% of severe's children damaged by the | :15:46. | :15:54. | |
civil conflict. -- Syria's children. When we debated this two weeks ago | :15:55. | :15:58. | |
there was scepticism across the chamber about the ceasefire, | :15:59. | :16:00. | |
although there have been significant breaches it has resulted in a huge | :16:01. | :16:06. | |
elimination of violence. It is the only ceasefire we have got. -- and | :16:07. | :16:10. | |
mean you should -- diminishing. Is it not the most credible explanation | :16:11. | :16:16. | |
for the Russian announcement, is that it is going to pressurise Assad | :16:17. | :16:21. | |
into taking a more flexible attack -- approach in the peace talks? And | :16:22. | :16:26. | |
if that is the case, it would be better if the Foreign Secretary had | :16:27. | :16:30. | |
the welcome and then the caveats, since it is not only the only | :16:31. | :16:34. | |
ceasefire we have got, it is also the only peace process we have got. | :16:35. | :16:40. | |
I think we all start out with hope and we end up with experience, and | :16:41. | :16:44. | |
in dealing with Russia I think putting the caveat first is probably | :16:45. | :16:52. | |
always sensible. It is a credible interpretation of what Mr Putin has | :16:53. | :16:55. | |
done, but unfortunately, unlike almost every other party with which | :16:56. | :17:02. | |
we work in these situations, we have no insight at all into Russia's | :17:03. | :17:06. | |
strategy, Russia's thinking, tactics, so we are left guessing. | :17:07. | :17:13. | |
And here we are 24 hours later, none of us including the Americans, who | :17:14. | :17:17. | |
Russia apparently craves a bilateral partnership with over Syria, having | :17:18. | :17:21. | |
any insight into what the purpose of this move is. | :17:22. | :17:26. | |
Can I invite my right honourable friend to admit that we have | :17:27. | :17:30. | |
probably be -- been unwise to become hooked on the simplest at notion | :17:31. | :17:34. | |
that the removal of Assad is a prerequisite for any solution at all | :17:35. | :17:38. | |
in Syria's is it not the case that even with this change in Russian | :17:39. | :17:43. | |
tactics, any progress towards peace is bound to retain any messy | :17:44. | :17:50. | |
elements within it? What is the Foreign Secretary think this | :17:51. | :17:53. | |
supposedly it from it for all the Syrian people is actually going to | :17:54. | :18:04. | |
come from? I can't agree, -- we assert that the removal of a side is | :18:05. | :18:08. | |
a prerequisite for peace, that is not a moral judgment -- Assad. | :18:09. | :18:22. | |
Somebody who has killed 360,000 of his people. | :18:23. | :18:29. | |
We also want a reconciliation between the different factions in | :18:30. | :18:32. | |
Syria, and those fighting against the regime are not going to lay down | :18:33. | :18:36. | |
their arms, they are not going to lay down their arms, unless and | :18:37. | :18:41. | |
until they are given an assurance that Bashar al-Assad will not be | :18:42. | :18:45. | |
part of the future in Syria, and yes of course it will be messy. And of | :18:46. | :18:50. | |
course he is right that there will be many stumbling blocks along the | :18:51. | :18:54. | |
way. But it is possible to envisage a transition which will see the | :18:55. | :18:57. | |
infrastructure of the state remain in place, but replace Bashar | :18:58. | :19:03. | |
al-Assad himself with another figure, possibly from within the | :19:04. | :19:10. | |
Alawite community as a head of a transitional administration. | :19:11. | :19:15. | |
The Foreign Secretary is quite right to treat this Russian announcement | :19:16. | :19:19. | |
along with all Russian announcements with extreme caution. But if this | :19:20. | :19:24. | |
does turn out to be positive, would that not vindicate the robust | :19:25. | :19:28. | |
approach that Britain and the European Union have taken towards | :19:29. | :19:30. | |
President Putin, and vindicate the decision taken by this House to | :19:31. | :19:34. | |
extend the highly successful IVF mission in Iraq, to Syria? | :19:35. | :19:42. | |
-- aria. I'm convinced myself that President Putin only recognises | :19:43. | :19:47. | |
strength. Everything is black and white, you are either standing up to | :19:48. | :19:53. | |
him or you have caved in. The action that the European Union took in | :19:54. | :19:59. | |
imposing sanctions against Russia over Ukraine surprised the Russians, | :20:00. | :20:03. | |
we know that, they didn't expect that the EU would be able to | :20:04. | :20:08. | |
establish unanimity to do this. It is so -- it surprised them even more | :20:09. | :20:13. | |
that we have managed to renew those distinctions twice and we are coming | :20:14. | :20:16. | |
up to the point that we will renew them again, -- sanctions. It has | :20:17. | :20:22. | |
surprised the Russians that the Coalition has held together in | :20:23. | :20:29. | |
respect of the battle against. Sticking to our guns, working with | :20:30. | :20:34. | |
the Russians where they are prepared to align with our objectives, and | :20:35. | :20:39. | |
being clear about our requirement of the Russians to comply with their | :20:40. | :20:42. | |
obligations under international law. That is the right way to proceed, I | :20:43. | :20:49. | |
don't think that seeking concessions to or favours from Mr Putin is a way | :20:50. | :20:54. | |
forward, it simply doesn't work like that. | :20:55. | :21:00. | |
In these very early days of the ceasefire and the talks in Geneva, | :21:01. | :21:05. | |
would my right honourable friend agree that in cautiously welcoming | :21:06. | :21:10. | |
this reported withdrawal of Russian troops we should not lose sight of | :21:11. | :21:13. | |
the need for the ongoing humanitarian aid to make sure it is | :21:14. | :21:17. | |
delivered to those in Syria and the region who need it, and to securing | :21:18. | :21:21. | |
a peaceful, long-term political solution to this problem. | :21:22. | :21:27. | |
The two reasons why the humanitarian aid has to go on being delivered, | :21:28. | :21:33. | |
and getting into parts it hasn't yet reached, first the obvious reason | :21:34. | :21:35. | |
that people on the ground desperately need it, but also to | :21:36. | :21:41. | |
enable the opposition who are at Geneva to stay there and carry on | :21:42. | :21:45. | |
talking. They are finding it very hard to maintain their legitimacy, | :21:46. | :21:50. | |
their credibility, with their supporters on the ground, if no | :21:51. | :21:54. | |
humanitarian aid is getting through and regime bombs, Russian bombs are | :21:55. | :21:59. | |
still falling on them. The Foreign Secretary said he has | :22:00. | :22:12. | |
not talked to Mr Lavrov. Why is that? Again, experience. I | :22:13. | :22:16. | |
haven't tried, and I have no doubt that I could predict quite confident | :22:17. | :22:24. | |
leave the outcome of a call to Foreign Minister Lavrov. I have had | :22:25. | :22:28. | |
many calls with him on the course of our regular meetings over Syria | :22:29. | :22:32. | |
related events, none of them fruitful. | :22:33. | :22:37. | |
It is depressing to calculate the sum total of human misery that has | :22:38. | :22:41. | |
resulted from Russia's intervention in this bloody civil war. Which has | :22:42. | :22:48. | |
gone right from vetoing attempts by countries to get an early resolution | :22:49. | :22:53. | |
to Assad and a transition Government in the early days, right through to, | :22:54. | :22:59. | |
as one NGO put it to me, the bombing of a hospital for time by Russian | :23:00. | :23:05. | |
planes. Can I reemphasise by asking my right honourable friend to treat | :23:06. | :23:10. | |
with huge caution this move, and hold Russia responsible for any war | :23:11. | :23:16. | |
crimes they have risen -- committed? My honourable friend reminds of | :23:17. | :23:21. | |
cosmopolitan fact, somebody goes in -- an important fact, somebody | :23:22. | :23:26. | |
starts bombing civilian populations and destroy hospitals and schools. | :23:27. | :23:30. | |
If they do decide five months later that they have done enough, let us | :23:31. | :23:34. | |
not give them too much praise. It is a bit like, you know, did you stop | :23:35. | :23:38. | |
beating his wife? The fact they are there in the first place is | :23:39. | :23:44. | |
something we have to continually protest about, and we shouldn't give | :23:45. | :23:47. | |
them any credit for St Brelade withdrawing from these illegal | :23:48. | :23:52. | |
activities. -- simply withdrawing. Despite | :23:53. | :23:57. | |
Russia's announcement many countries remain fully committed to military | :23:58. | :24:01. | |
action in Syria, we have seen an escalation over five years of the | :24:02. | :24:07. | |
humanitarian crisis and the refugee crisis across Europe. Can the | :24:08. | :24:10. | |
Secretary of State tell the House, what proportion of Government | :24:11. | :24:13. | |
spending relating to the crisis has been spent on military action? As | :24:14. | :24:18. | |
compared to the provision of humanitarian aid. And building a | :24:19. | :24:22. | |
long-term peace solution for the people of Syria. | :24:23. | :24:26. | |
I can't give the lady the precise figures, but we have contributed | :24:27. | :24:34. | |
over ?1.1 billion of humanitarian aid to Syria and the neighbouring | :24:35. | :24:40. | |
countries to is support displaced persons and refugees. Military | :24:41. | :24:43. | |
operation, which has been running in Syria since the boat of this House a | :24:44. | :24:55. | |
mere month ago -- the vote. I am quite certain it will be in the | :24:56. | :25:00. | |
double figures of millions. Given Russia's past history in the last 30 | :25:01. | :25:04. | |
years of changing horses at the last moment, would he now be advising | :25:05. | :25:09. | |
President Assad to double his bodyguard? Well, the relationship | :25:10. | :25:16. | |
between President Assad and President Putin is a subject of | :25:17. | :25:22. | |
great speculation among colleagues on the ISS G circuit. I am clear | :25:23. | :25:30. | |
that the situation is the same as it has always been. President Putin | :25:31. | :25:34. | |
could have ended all this years ago I a single phone call to President | :25:35. | :25:40. | |
Assad, offering him some fraternal advice about his future health and | :25:41. | :25:49. | |
well-being. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I agree with the Foreign Secretary | :25:50. | :25:52. | |
that we should be cautious about these latest developments, but can I | :25:53. | :25:56. | |
ask him whether he thinks that Assad is in a stronger position now than | :25:57. | :26:02. | |
he was six months ago? In military terms, certainly. The Russian | :26:03. | :26:06. | |
intervention has prevented the collapse of regime forces, restored | :26:07. | :26:13. | |
morale among regime forces, allowed the regime to take ground, | :26:14. | :26:18. | |
consolidate decisions, move forces around in a strategically | :26:19. | :26:22. | |
significant way in the country, and has damaged and demoralised | :26:23. | :26:26. | |
opposition groups. There is no doubt at all about that. The question of | :26:27. | :26:30. | |
course, if there is a genuine withdrawal of Russian air cover, how | :26:31. | :26:37. | |
long that improvement can be sustained, because we know that the | :26:38. | :26:40. | |
Syrian regime forces are fundamentally hollowed out after | :26:41. | :26:47. | |
five years of civil war. Without the Russians there to stiffen the spine, | :26:48. | :26:50. | |
it is not clear how long they would be able to maintain the initiative. | :26:51. | :26:56. | |
Assuming that the Russian withdrawal does take place, I and there is no | :26:57. | :27:01. | |
certainty in fact, will be UK air forces be taking over Russian | :27:02. | :27:08. | |
targets against Daesh, with the intensity of the arguments against | :27:09. | :27:17. | |
Daesh is not Russian withdrawal? I can't comment about what will drive | :27:18. | :27:21. | |
US and UK targeting decisions. What I can say is that the Russian air | :27:22. | :27:26. | |
force operates largely within a part of Syria which is heavily protected | :27:27. | :27:31. | |
by the Syrian integrated air defence system. The Russians are able to | :27:32. | :27:35. | |
apply there because they are operating in a permissive | :27:36. | :27:39. | |
environment for them, not least because Russian technicians | :27:40. | :27:41. | |
controlled the Syrian defence system. It would not be the same | :27:42. | :27:47. | |
situation for US, UK and other coalition partners. I don't think | :27:48. | :27:50. | |
there can be an assumption that Western members of the coalition | :27:51. | :27:54. | |
would be able to take over all of the targeting activity against Daesh | :27:55. | :28:00. | |
that is currently being taken out by the Russians. Whilst acknowledging | :28:01. | :28:03. | |
that Assad is principally to blame for the submission of his own | :28:04. | :28:07. | |
citizens, and therefore the departure of the Russians is | :28:08. | :28:12. | |
unlikely to have an effect on the humanitarian aid system, does the | :28:13. | :28:16. | |
Foreign Secretary envisage any new initiatives to ensure that aid does | :28:17. | :28:19. | |
reach the parts of Syria that are currently being stars? The situation | :28:20. | :28:25. | |
on humanitarian aid is that it is there. It is ready to move. The | :28:26. | :28:30. | |
world food programme has got the resources it needs, the food and | :28:31. | :28:36. | |
other medical supplies ready to go. The issue is simply access, | :28:37. | :28:41. | |
principally that is an issue of regime obstruction. In some places, | :28:42. | :28:45. | |
it has been overcome. In other places, it is still a problem. This | :28:46. | :28:52. | |
is something that UN people are working on day and night on the | :28:53. | :28:55. | |
ground to try and resolve. It is literally progressing through one | :28:56. | :28:58. | |
checkpoint and then trying to negotiate through the next | :28:59. | :29:04. | |
checkpoint. Following on from the question from my honourable friends | :29:05. | :29:09. | |
from Huntington, the Kremlin say that the Russian presence in Syria | :29:10. | :29:13. | |
is to counter terrorism, but there are no terrorism groups with fighter | :29:14. | :29:20. | |
jets. Is it not the case that if Russia are serious about | :29:21. | :29:22. | |
de-escalating the situation and moving towards a peaceful solution, | :29:23. | :29:29. | |
that they will also withdraw the S 400 system? I think our | :29:30. | :29:36. | |
understanding is that the S 400 system was probably deployed in | :29:37. | :29:40. | |
order to protect the Russian installation, so it was part of the | :29:41. | :29:45. | |
protective bubble that the Russians delivered into Syria around their | :29:46. | :29:50. | |
own installations to their bases and a naval port. We will obviously have | :29:51. | :29:56. | |
to wait and see the extent, if any, of the withdrawal that has been | :29:57. | :29:58. | |
announced, and whether it includes those weapons. In seeking further | :29:59. | :30:06. | |
clarity on this deeply cynical announcement, can he or his US | :30:07. | :30:11. | |
allies clarify that the Russians Government has set out any | :30:12. | :30:14. | |
conditions linked to their withdrawal that will negatively | :30:15. | :30:16. | |
impact on the political negotiations. Given the tens of | :30:17. | :30:24. | |
thousands of vulnerable Syrians that exists up and down the country, | :30:25. | :30:30. | |
should we be looking at a bombing zone, particularly along the border | :30:31. | :30:33. | |
of Turkey. As far as we're aware, there is conditionality appointed | :30:34. | :30:42. | |
with it. It was a unilateral action announced by Russia, so the | :30:43. | :30:47. | |
withdrawal is a unilateral action. No negotiations or conditionality. | :30:48. | :30:52. | |
She me about no bombing zones. The problem with a no bombing zone is | :30:53. | :30:58. | |
essentially the point I have just made to my honourable friends, that | :30:59. | :31:06. | |
Syria has a very capable ground to air integrated defence Systems, | :31:07. | :31:10. | |
which makes it difficult for anybody's invoiced in a | :31:11. | :31:13. | |
non-permissive environment to enforce such a no bombing zone. -- | :31:14. | :31:24. | |
enforce. It is possible to enforce a no bombing zone around Syria, but | :31:25. | :31:30. | |
they would be complex issues involved. It has been raised and | :31:31. | :31:37. | |
discussed, but so far volunteers to police such a no bombing zone have | :31:38. | :31:43. | |
not been rushing forward. The Foreign Secretary referred to Iran | :31:44. | :31:49. | |
earlier. People know that the two regional powers of Iran and Saudi | :31:50. | :31:55. | |
Arabia have vastly contradictory views of Syria, and in particular | :31:56. | :32:00. | |
the future of president Assad. We'll use has good offices to make sure | :32:01. | :32:04. | |
that these two countries get around the table to negotiate like we saw | :32:05. | :32:08. | |
in Vienna? Until there is greater dialogue between these two powers, | :32:09. | :32:11. | |
they will continue to be the tensions that we have seen over the | :32:12. | :32:15. | |
last five years will stop he is right that Iran and Saudi Arabia | :32:16. | :32:22. | |
have fundamentally different views about the future trajectory of | :32:23. | :32:26. | |
Syria, but they are both part of the ISS G. They both did come to the | :32:27. | :32:31. | |
table in Vienna and sit there for two days, or wherever it was, and | :32:32. | :32:36. | |
talked to each other, and they are still both showing up to regular | :32:37. | :32:40. | |
ISSG meetings. It doesn't mean they agree with each other, but it is | :32:41. | :32:44. | |
progress, that they are at least sitting around the same table. Thank | :32:45. | :32:51. | |
you. The Foreign Secretary has mentioned the humanitarian convoys | :32:52. | :32:54. | |
on the ground in Syria. More of them are getting through, but it is | :32:55. | :33:01. | |
nowhere near the access the United Nations would need. What is the | :33:02. | :33:05. | |
Foreign Secretary's assessment of how this latest Russian announcement | :33:06. | :33:08. | |
may give further opportunities to put pressure on the Syrian regime | :33:09. | :33:14. | |
itself to allow more aid through? As I have already said, I don't think | :33:15. | :33:20. | |
that even if the Russians do withdraw forces, I don't think | :33:21. | :33:23. | |
that'll make any direct impact the ability of human supplies to get in. | :33:24. | :33:31. | |
Obviously, the things that almost assist the humanitarian supplies is | :33:32. | :33:35. | |
the continuation of a cessation of hostilities. What actually happens | :33:36. | :33:38. | |
on the ground next will depend on how any Russian withdrawal takes | :33:39. | :33:45. | |
place, over what time period, and how the regime 's response to that. | :33:46. | :33:51. | |
The cynic may suggest that the Syrian regime may have use the last | :33:52. | :33:59. | |
two weeks to prepare for this moment. Perhaps the Syrian regime | :34:00. | :34:02. | |
did know it was coming and perhaps they are prepared for it. The | :34:03. | :34:10. | |
intervention by Russia in Syria was a surprise to the west. This | :34:11. | :34:14. | |
withdrawal, if it is genuine, is also a surprise. Russia's | :34:15. | :34:19. | |
interventions have been unhelpful but influential. Can he advise me | :34:20. | :34:25. | |
what steps we can and are taking with our allies to stop Russia | :34:26. | :34:31. | |
setting the agenda in Syria? It is a good question. It very difficult one | :34:32. | :34:37. | |
to answer. The fact is, that all the other partners, the Western partners | :34:38. | :34:46. | |
in this enterprise play by the rules of the international system. They | :34:47. | :34:52. | |
are transparent about their intentions. We had a debate in this | :34:53. | :34:56. | |
Parliament, a discussion that went on for a couple of years, before we | :34:57. | :35:02. | |
got to the point of deciding to engage in air strikes in Syria. The | :35:03. | :35:07. | |
entire world knew about the debate in the UK and where is the fault | :35:08. | :35:11. | |
lines were in that debate. Unfortunately, Russia is a state in | :35:12. | :35:15. | |
which all power is concentrated in the hands of one man. Decisions are | :35:16. | :35:25. | |
made apparently arbitrarily, without any advance signalling, and as we | :35:26. | :35:29. | |
are now seeing, they can be and made just as quickly. This is not a | :35:30. | :35:35. | |
recipe for enhancing stability and predictability and the international | :35:36. | :35:39. | |
scene. It makes the world a more dangerous place, not a less | :35:40. | :35:43. | |
dangerous place. The Foreign Secretary is right not to spin | :35:44. | :35:50. | |
Putin's announcement, but to wait for the evidence. If however it does | :35:51. | :35:55. | |
serve to recondition some of Assad's assumptions about the negotiations, | :35:56. | :35:58. | |
and if it does mean that elements in the opposition feel a bit more | :35:59. | :36:02. | |
encouraged about the worth of their purpose in the negotiations, we | :36:03. | :36:06. | |
should also be looking at it as an opportunity to make the dialogue | :36:07. | :36:14. | |
more inclusive, not least for women. Our intention is that the dialogue | :36:15. | :36:21. | |
showed the inclusive, representative of all faith groups, all ethnicities | :36:22. | :36:27. | |
within the Syria, and also representative of civil society, | :36:28. | :36:30. | |
including, of course, women. We shouldn't forget that before this | :36:31. | :36:37. | |
horror started, Syria was in, bizarrely, one of the most liberal | :36:38. | :36:44. | |
countries in terms of tolerance of religious minorities, tolerance of | :36:45. | :36:48. | |
secular behaviour, the role of women, participation of women in | :36:49. | :36:53. | |
society and the professions and employment. That is something that | :36:54. | :36:56. | |
we would certainly need to get back to you, as Syria Read normalises in | :36:57. | :37:07. | |
the future. Would he agree with me that one of the greatest problems we | :37:08. | :37:11. | |
face in this situation, we have no real idea of the military resources | :37:12. | :37:18. | |
that Russia put into Syria, so have no idea whether they have really | :37:19. | :37:24. | |
withdrawn from Syria. Have you taken this into account in the coming | :37:25. | :37:28. | |
months? I'm not sure I entirely agree. I think we have quite a | :37:29. | :37:32. | |
reasonable assessment of the military resource that Russia has in | :37:33. | :37:40. | |
Syria and we will be able to now monitor whether that resource is | :37:41. | :37:43. | |
being genuinely withdrawn, or simply rotated. Given that Daesh has not | :37:44. | :37:52. | |
been the main focus of Russian air strikes, to what extent does my | :37:53. | :37:57. | |
friends think that the Russians would advocate a petition of Syria? | :37:58. | :38:05. | |
It's a subject of speculation, whether the immediate objective of | :38:06. | :38:11. | |
the Assad regime and indeed of the Russians is to carve out some kind | :38:12. | :38:17. | |
of mini state in the north-west of Syria, but, as I have said many | :38:18. | :38:22. | |
times this morning, because we have no dialogue about these things, | :38:23. | :38:25. | |
because Russia is completely and transparent about its motives and | :38:26. | :38:36. | |
its plans, we can only speculate. For any peaceful transition in | :38:37. | :38:40. | |
Syria, along with the Russian withdrawal, Iran would also need to | :38:41. | :38:46. | |
withdraw its militia, military personnel, military advisers, which | :38:47. | :38:48. | |
had been supporting the brutal Assad regime. Do we have any news on that? | :38:49. | :39:00. | |
Well, our views are that my honourable friend is right. Clearly, | :39:01. | :39:03. | |
for there to be a sustainable peace in Syria, the militias and the | :39:04. | :39:09. | |
Iranian sponsors and advisers will have to be stood down, just as the | :39:10. | :39:14. | |
Russians will have two withdraw their forces. But we have no | :39:15. | :39:19. | |
indication yet that we are going to see a matching announcement from | :39:20. | :39:25. | |
withdrawal of Iranians back to withdrawal of Iranians back to | :39:26. | :39:32. | |
forces from Syria. Given the experience we had in Crimea and | :39:33. | :39:36. | |
eastern Ukraine, when forces that looked like Russian forces were and | :39:37. | :39:40. | |
like Russian forces and behaved like them arrived and then disavowed, | :39:41. | :39:44. | |
what confidence do we have that this will be a genuine withdrawal and we | :39:45. | :39:48. | |
won't see forces carrying a Russian flag disappeared, only to be replace | :39:49. | :39:51. | |
on the ground by first-ever suspiciously like them? | :39:52. | :39:56. | |
What we are primarily talking about here is a forces, and that trick is | :39:57. | :40:03. | |
a little more difficult to perform when we are talking about advanced | :40:04. | :40:08. | |
strike aircraft. But we can't roll out the possibility of Russian | :40:09. | :40:13. | |
sponsored irregular forces playing some future role in this conflict. | :40:14. | :40:16. | |
-- ruler. Before we come to points of order | :40:17. | :40:23. | |
only to make a short statement which I hope will help the hosts in the | :40:24. | :40:27. | |
matter to come. Owing to a printing error, and incorrect version of the | :40:28. | :40:32. | |
programme motion has been printed on the order paper. The collection will | :40:33. | :40:40. | |
be in the vote office and online shortly. -- correction. The | :40:41. | :40:45. | |
significant difference is that two days are proposed for consideration | :40:46. | :40:49. | |
and third Reading, rather than the one day referred to incorrectly on | :40:50. | :40:55. | |
the order paper. -- third reading. And the motion will be moved in this | :40:56. | :41:00. | |
correct form after second reading. My understanding is that two days we | :41:01. | :41:05. | |
wanted by all parties, so they should I think be rejoicing about | :41:06. | :41:14. | |
this matter. It wasn't a point of order, it was a | :41:15. | :41:19. | |
statement at the right honourable gentleman's usually got points of | :41:20. | :41:22. | |
order before breakfast, lunch and dinner so I am happy to hear his | :41:23. | :41:28. | |
point of order. His statement that the two days was | :41:29. | :41:34. | |
agreed by all parties is actually agreed by the frontbenchers. Many of | :41:35. | :41:38. | |
us believe that this enormous constitutional Bill about privacy | :41:39. | :41:44. | |
and security requires four days, that is at least a dozen major | :41:45. | :41:47. | |
things that need to be dealt with, and we will not be able to do it in | :41:48. | :41:54. | |
committee. I ask him actually, can he give his advice to us as front | :41:55. | :41:58. | |
bench -- backbenchers, how do we get this Bill debated properly? I | :41:59. | :42:09. | |
respect the right honourable gentleman's sincerity, and what is | :42:10. | :42:13. | |
wanted by the frontbenchers is not necessarily the same as what is | :42:14. | :42:18. | |
wanted by the back. I have no control over the programme motion. | :42:19. | :42:22. | |
And that is a matter for the House. All I can say is that if there is | :42:23. | :42:29. | |
very strong cross-party feeling, I have a sense that ministers will | :42:30. | :42:34. | |
inevitably be on the roof and -- receiving end of it. And having got | :42:35. | :42:39. | |
the list in front of me is the right honourable gentleman is subtly in | :42:40. | :42:43. | |
the process advertising his own interest in being called to speak, I | :42:44. | :42:45. | |
think his effort has been successful. Part of order, Mr Andrew | :42:46. | :42:56. | |
Griffiths. A few moments ago amongst all the excitement of hearing what | :42:57. | :43:01. | |
the Government were doing to support the pubs industry, and in event | :43:02. | :43:05. | |
today forgot to draw the House's attention to my register of | :43:06. | :43:13. | |
interests. -- inadvertently. Good I rectify the mistake? He has found | :43:14. | :43:18. | |
his own salvation. I am deeply indebted to him, as of course is the | :43:19. | :43:25. | |
House. On March the 8th, the Member for Birmingham Yardley made a very | :43:26. | :43:29. | |
powerful speech in this chamber which you yourself described as | :43:30. | :43:34. | |
moving. And the most striking part of that speech is when she read out | :43:35. | :43:38. | |
a list of the names of women who have died in the past year as a | :43:39. | :43:44. | |
result of domestic violence. In 2009, after lists of those who had | :43:45. | :43:51. | |
fallen in Iraq and Afghanistan had been read in this chamber, | :43:52. | :43:55. | |
prohibition was introduced from the chair saying that no longer would | :43:56. | :44:00. | |
members be allowed to read out lists of the fallen, and we are now in the | :44:01. | :44:05. | |
strange permission where it is permissible to read at those who | :44:06. | :44:09. | |
have died as a result of domestic violence, but prohibited to read out | :44:10. | :44:12. | |
the lists of those who have fallen in the service of this country. | :44:13. | :44:17. | |
Could you reflect on this, and introduce perhaps a rule that would | :44:18. | :44:20. | |
allow members to make the speeches they decide to make rather than the | :44:21. | :44:28. | |
limited by conditions laid out by the chair? I thank the honourable | :44:29. | :44:33. | |
gentleman for his point of order, and for his characteristic courtesy | :44:34. | :44:37. | |
in giving the advance notice of it. I appreciate that the honourable | :44:38. | :44:41. | |
member feels that there is inconsistency between the latitude | :44:42. | :44:45. | |
allowed by the chair to the honourable lady, the Member for | :44:46. | :44:49. | |
Birmingham Yardley, in the debate to mark International women's's day, | :44:50. | :44:52. | |
and earlier rulings from the chair on his own attempts to read out the | :44:53. | :44:56. | |
names of members of the Armed Forces who had died in operations overseas. | :44:57. | :45:00. | |
These are matters of judgment for the chair. And my immediate response | :45:01. | :45:06. | |
to him, I am happy to reflect upon it further, is that they are I think | :45:07. | :45:12. | |
best approached on a case-by-case basis. My concern is that there | :45:13. | :45:19. | |
should be reasonable -- reasonableness and balance in this | :45:20. | :45:24. | |
-- these matters. I don't think the House would receive it well if list | :45:25. | :45:34. | |
reading became a very regular phenomenon. Or indeed if I may say | :45:35. | :45:43. | |
so, a repetitive campaign tool. However, I simply say to the | :45:44. | :45:46. | |
honourable gentleman that it is open to members to seek my thoughts in | :45:47. | :45:54. | |
advance on these matters, if they have such an intention in mind. And | :45:55. | :46:01. | |
I think I will if I may leave it there for today, I appreciate his | :46:02. | :46:04. | |
sincerity and I hope he appreciates mine. If there are no further points | :46:05. | :46:11. | |
of order, we come now to the ten minute rule motion. Caroline Flint. | :46:12. | :46:18. | |
I beg to move that need be given to bringing in a Bill to reply -- | :46:19. | :46:22. | |
require certain multinationals to include within the annual financial | :46:23. | :46:26. | |
reporting specified information prepared in accordance with the | :46:27. | :46:29. | |
organisation for economic cooperation on a country by country | :46:30. | :46:35. | |
basis and for connected purposes. My thanks for the opportunity to | :46:36. | :46:39. | |
prevent -- present this modest Bill, which seeks to move in tackling tax | :46:40. | :46:44. | |
avoidance but takes it one step further. One small step for this | :46:45. | :46:48. | |
House, but the results of which will be a huge step forward for those who | :46:49. | :46:53. | |
believe in tax justice, fairness and transparency in the UK and globally. | :46:54. | :46:59. | |
My Bill will ensure the important -- that important information about | :47:00. | :47:04. | |
large companies is published by a -- companies house. Information that by | :47:05. | :47:10. | |
UK law, such companies will have two provide to HMIC from the first | :47:11. | :47:15. | |
January this year. I'm delighted my Bill has received cross-party | :47:16. | :47:19. | |
support and is being backed by the tax Justice network, Oxfam, | :47:20. | :47:24. | |
Christian Aid and others. We all shared concerns that the way in | :47:25. | :47:27. | |
which multinational companies shift profits to low tax dominions, | :47:28. | :47:33. | |
sometimes even when the employees there are zero. The headlines caused | :47:34. | :47:39. | |
by the recent Google tax deal reflected public consternation. How | :47:40. | :47:42. | |
could a company with thousands of UK employees, five offices, a new ?1 | :47:43. | :47:47. | |
billion headquarters to be built near King's Cross with the UK only | :47:48. | :47:52. | |
second to the US in terms of revenues, only pay up ?130 million | :47:53. | :47:57. | |
in tax after six years of investigation into a tax period of | :47:58. | :48:03. | |
ten years? Bear in mind their global revenues for 2015 were $74 billion. | :48:04. | :48:08. | |
With my colleagues on the Public Accounts Committee, we questioned | :48:09. | :48:12. | |
both Google and HMIC. But we are still unclear as to whether the | :48:13. | :48:19. | |
hundred 30 -- ?130 -- 100 ?30 million represented a good deal. I | :48:20. | :48:22. | |
understand the protection of tax Prevacid, especially when it comes | :48:23. | :48:26. | |
to individuals. But we live in a world where multinationals you | :48:27. | :48:31. | |
transfer pricing and shell companies to shift profits from one country to | :48:32. | :48:38. | |
another. -- tax provision. Isn't it extraordinary that in 2010 Bermuda | :48:39. | :48:42. | |
had total reported corporate profits that were the equivalent of 1643% of | :48:43. | :48:49. | |
their actual GDP? Could that be because Bermuda has a zero rate of | :48:50. | :48:55. | |
corporation tax? Isn't it extraordinary that sales staff for | :48:56. | :48:59. | |
Google in the UK sell an advert to a company in the UK, yet the | :49:00. | :49:04. | |
transaction is confirmed online via Ireland, where the prevailing | :49:05. | :49:14. | |
corporate tax rate is 12.5% as opposed to 20% in the UK? This | :49:15. | :49:17. | |
problem is not confined to Google or online businesses. Coffey chains, | :49:18. | :49:19. | |
oil companies, drinks companies, pharmaceuticals, what they all have | :49:20. | :49:22. | |
in common is that they are multinationals. The back -- the | :49:23. | :49:26. | |
impact of entirely lawful manipulation of different countries | :49:27. | :49:30. | |
proposed tax rules is that countries find the tax base is undermined and | :49:31. | :49:35. | |
profits are shifted not through any real economic activity but through | :49:36. | :49:38. | |
arbitrary internal charges between different units of the same company. | :49:39. | :49:48. | |
The impact is to create unfair competition providing a competitive | :49:49. | :49:51. | |
advantage over say, a domestic UK rival paying 20% tax on its profits. | :49:52. | :49:56. | |
It is these strange arrangements that enabled Facebook to pay just | :49:57. | :50:03. | |
?4377 in corporation tax in 2014. The same year it paid 35mm pounds in | :50:04. | :50:11. | |
bonuses to UK-based staff. That is a very, very strange form of | :50:12. | :50:17. | |
performance pay. AstraZeneca paid no corporation tax in 2014, 2015, yet | :50:18. | :50:24. | |
2014 was a remarkable year for them according to its CEO. It had full | :50:25. | :50:30. | |
year revenues of over $26 billion. Vodafone, British American Tobacco, | :50:31. | :50:34. | |
the list of corporate giants with like UK tax bills goes on. I fully | :50:35. | :50:39. | |
support the Chancellor's legislation to require financial reporting to | :50:40. | :50:43. | |
HMIC from UK-based multinationals with revenues in excess of | :50:44. | :50:47. | |
approximately ?600 million, and UK units of such companies, whether | :50:48. | :50:52. | |
parent company is based in a country which does not yet agreed to country | :50:53. | :50:56. | |
by country reporting. This reporting in accordance to OECD guidelines | :50:57. | :51:02. | |
would include showing for each tax jurisdiction in which they do | :51:03. | :51:06. | |
business, the amount of revenue, profit before income tax and income | :51:07. | :51:11. | |
tax paid and approved. And their total employment capital of retained | :51:12. | :51:14. | |
earnings and tangible assets. They would also be required to identify | :51:15. | :51:19. | |
each entity within the group doing business in a particular tax | :51:20. | :51:23. | |
jurisdiction, and provide an indication of business activities | :51:24. | :51:26. | |
within a selection of broad areas which each entity is engaged in. The | :51:27. | :51:31. | |
Government's proposals would make about 400 companies share some or | :51:32. | :51:36. | |
all of its -- their activities worth world from -- worldwide, but we can | :51:37. | :51:47. | |
do more. By requiring this information to be published, not | :51:48. | :51:49. | |
only will HMIC see the bigger picture so will we. Publication is | :51:50. | :51:51. | |
one way to ensure that these companies explain their tax planning | :51:52. | :51:53. | |
but also restore the tarnished reputations. I believe it would | :51:54. | :51:57. | |
deter companies from using tax havens and shell companies, sent a | :51:58. | :52:05. | |
strong signal to developing countries. Charities say that | :52:06. | :52:14. | |
developing countries lose more in potential revenue each year owing to | :52:15. | :52:17. | |
corporate tax dodging than the amount given annually in overseas | :52:18. | :52:21. | |
aid by all richer countries. That made me stop and think. Stop and | :52:22. | :52:28. | |
think about how much more we could do to enable developing countries to | :52:29. | :52:32. | |
prosper and be more self-sufficient through measures such as my Bill. Ed | :52:33. | :52:38. | |
is vital for pro-relations, but just as important is a hand-out, -- hand | :52:39. | :52:44. | |
up, not just a hand-out. That will not happen unless we force this | :52:45. | :52:47. | |
companies to come clean. I looked the Chancellor for support with my | :52:48. | :52:52. | |
Bill, and I may be onto a winner when the budget is announced | :52:53. | :52:56. | |
tomorrow. I reminded the Chancellor in the letter that this Bill is in | :52:57. | :52:59. | |
keeping with his own sentiments, when in February he told an | :53:00. | :53:03. | |
international meeting of finance ministers, "I think we should be | :53:04. | :53:07. | |
moving to more public, country by country reporting, this is something | :53:08. | :53:11. | |
the UK will seek to promote internationally." I agree, but I say | :53:12. | :53:17. | |
to the Chancellor, why wait? The tide is turning against secrecy, | :53:18. | :53:21. | |
with business led organisations encouraging firms to be open about | :53:22. | :53:25. | |
their taxes and not to use tax havens. It's immoral's budget or the | :53:26. | :53:29. | |
Finance Bill that follows, the Government can adopt this measure | :53:30. | :53:33. | |
and be in front of the pack. -- in tomorrow's budget. We all want | :53:34. | :53:40. | |
successful companies in the UK, as do our constituents. But we want | :53:41. | :53:44. | |
them to pay fair tax. Too many multinational companies seem to be | :53:45. | :53:48. | |
choosing the tax they want to pay, rather than paying the tax they | :53:49. | :53:53. | |
should pay, by a complicated international arrangement. The | :53:54. | :53:57. | |
winners from public reporting are the Government, HMIC, those | :53:58. | :54:00. | |
businesses and taxpayers who have already paid fair taxes, and | :54:01. | :54:04. | |
developing countries who are losing out. But multinationals should not | :54:05. | :54:09. | |
see this as a threat, but as an opportunity to | :54:10. | :54:26. | |
restore the reputation of their brand. They can be winners as well. | :54:27. | :54:30. | |
My Bill has received support from right honourable and honourable | :54:31. | :54:32. | |
members across the House, I am so delighted to have received support | :54:33. | :54:34. | |
from ten of my colleagues reflecting all the political parties on the | :54:35. | :54:36. | |
Public Accounts Committee. Members from five separate parties have | :54:37. | :54:39. | |
agreed to sponsor the Bill. And I thank them for that. It is time for | :54:40. | :54:41. | |
multinational corporations to come clean and play fair with Government | :54:42. | :54:44. | |
and the public. And we can start with the UK. In the interests of | :54:45. | :54:48. | |
social justice, fairness and yes, it -- good business, I commend the Bill | :54:49. | :54:55. | |
to the House. Vote-macro As many as are of the | :54:56. | :54:57. | |
opinion, say "aye". To the contrary, "no". | :54:58. | :55:04. | |
I think the ayes have it. Who will repair -- prepare and bring in the | :55:05. | :55:09. | |
Bill. Karen Smith, Anne-Marie Trevelyan, | :55:10. | :55:14. | |
Nigel Mills, Dame Margaret Hodge, Stephen Kinnock, Jeremy Lefroy, | :55:15. | :55:17. | |
Doctor Philippa Whitford, Mark Durkan and myself. | :55:18. | :55:36. | |
Multinational Eterprises financial transparency. Friday, 22nd of April. | :55:37. | :56:15. | |
Clark will now read the orders. Investigated powers. How he received | :56:16. | :56:24. | |
a communication from the government, about the interception of | :56:25. | :56:28. | |
Communications department, under those bill, if the government | :56:29. | :56:31. | |
decides to intercept the communications of members of | :56:32. | :56:34. | |
Parliament, they have got to consult the Prime Minister, is it not wise | :56:35. | :56:46. | |
we consider you as well? You have to ensure the independence of this | :56:47. | :56:49. | |
Parliament, it is surely not correct that one part of the executive | :56:50. | :56:56. | |
should and does it communications, and the head should authorise? | :56:57. | :57:04. | |
Nobody should be judged, in his or her own course. I am here merely to | :57:05. | :57:19. | |
serve. It is good, of the honourable gentleman, to put me for this | :57:20. | :57:22. | |
voluntarily rule. Those should be the judge. But I do note the | :57:23. | :57:32. | |
substantive point, and if you sure that the Home Secretary will have | :57:33. | :57:39. | |
heard what he has to say. If she does not respond to his point, he | :57:40. | :57:43. | |
will probably make it again, and again, and conceivably, again. To | :57:44. | :57:49. | |
move the second reading, the Home Secretary. Thank you Mr Speaker. Mr | :57:50. | :58:00. | |
Speaker, before I began, members of the house will be aware of the death | :58:01. | :58:12. | |
of a prison officer attacked ten days ago in east Belfast. The | :58:13. | :58:16. | |
deepest sympathies, to his friends, family and colleagues. Consolidating | :58:17. | :58:24. | |
the country's investigative powers, inner wheel all that will stand the | :58:25. | :58:29. | |
test of time. Over the last two years, detailed analysis of those | :58:30. | :58:34. | |
investigatory powers,, consultation with law enforcement, intelligence | :58:35. | :58:40. | |
agencies, and industry. And following the publication of the | :58:41. | :58:44. | |
draft last autumn, scrutiny by a joint committee of both Houses of | :58:45. | :58:50. | |
Parliament, and the science and technology committee. I want to | :58:51. | :58:56. | |
begin by placing an Rickard, my gratitude to the cheer people of | :58:57. | :59:08. | |
those committees, and noble lord Murphy, for the work that those | :59:09. | :59:12. | |
members have undertaken. The scrutiny has helped to improve the | :59:13. | :59:17. | |
bill, reflecting the majority of recommendations. The revised bill is | :59:18. | :59:29. | |
clearer. It includes stronger privacy, bolstering protection, and | :59:30. | :59:34. | |
prevents agencies from asking foreign agencies to intercept | :59:35. | :59:41. | |
communications, unless the other one and approved by the Secretary of | :59:42. | :59:46. | |
State. It reduces the amount of ten, in which urgent warrants must be | :59:47. | :59:54. | |
reviewed, from five to three. And it strengthens the perils of the | :59:55. | :59:56. | |
Commissioner. Alongside introduction of the bill, also records of | :59:57. | :00:01. | |
practice, so that they could be reviewed. Under this bill... The | :00:02. | :00:17. | |
present system, to be reduced to one, can the Secretary of State | :00:18. | :00:21. | |
convince the house, it is in the interests of freedom and democracy, | :00:22. | :00:24. | |
that we reduce the number of commissioners? I have to say to the | :00:25. | :00:34. | |
honourable gentleman, one person overseeing the commission, they will | :00:35. | :00:40. | |
have an dobbing a number of judicial commissioners. Extensive expedience, | :00:41. | :00:49. | |
undertaking tasks, the question of the new process of authorisation. | :00:50. | :00:59. | |
Also, undertaking the inspection and review of the operation of the | :01:00. | :01:04. | |
agencies. In the way the three have so far. This is actually going to | :01:05. | :01:11. | |
enhance the oversight. Mr Speaker, the scrutiny that this bill has | :01:12. | :01:15. | |
undergone, builds upon the previous work of the Intelligence and | :01:16. | :01:19. | |
Security Committee, the independent enquiry, into the practices, | :01:20. | :01:26. | |
convened by the Royal United services, and carried out by David | :01:27. | :01:33. | |
Allison QC. All the reviews made clear, that legislation made clear | :01:34. | :01:38. | |
the of communications needed to be consolidated and made clear. Taken | :01:39. | :01:44. | |
together, the scrutiny that this has received could be without | :01:45. | :01:49. | |
precedence. Three reports informed the drafting. The committees then | :01:50. | :01:56. | |
scrutinise that, I now that precedes, for proper consideration | :01:57. | :02:05. | |
by both Houses of Parliament. This bill will provide world leading | :02:06. | :02:12. | |
information. It is going to provide unparalleled openness, treat the | :02:13. | :02:18. | |
stronger safeguards and establish a rigorous oversight fishing. The data | :02:19. | :02:29. | |
prevention act, which it intends to replace, contains a sunset clause, | :02:30. | :02:32. | |
requiring us to pass legislation by the end of 2016. This is the team | :02:33. | :02:40. | |
table set by Parliament. And threats we face mean we have to. Terrorists | :02:41. | :02:48. | |
are operating online, with the region that has never existed | :02:49. | :02:53. | |
before. They will continue to do so, so long as it gives them a perceived | :02:54. | :02:58. | |
advantage. We must ensure that those charged with keeping us safe are | :02:59. | :03:05. | |
able to keep his. This will provide the intelligence agencies with the | :03:06. | :03:10. | |
peril that they need, and it will ensure that they can continue the | :03:11. | :03:15. | |
tremendous work that so often goes unreported. To protect the people of | :03:16. | :03:20. | |
this country, from those who mean heart. -- harm. The Intelligence and | :03:21. | :03:30. | |
Security Committee concluded that privacy protection should form the | :03:31. | :03:37. | |
backbone of the legislation, that is indeed the case. It's strictly | :03:38. | :03:41. | |
limits the public authorities can use these investigatory powers, has | :03:42. | :03:49. | |
the sort, and sets it in more detail the safeguards that are to the | :03:50. | :03:56. | |
material obtained. Bill starts with an assumption of privacy, and | :03:57. | :04:00. | |
communication, part one provides an offence for unlawful interception, | :04:01. | :04:09. | |
it can be resulting in a custodial sentence. Recklessly obtaining | :04:10. | :04:13. | |
communication data, without lawful organisation. Misuse of these | :04:14. | :04:19. | |
powers, by police, and other authorities would be the penalties. | :04:20. | :04:28. | |
And it abolishes the powers, to obtain communications data. Public | :04:29. | :04:30. | |
authorities would in future only be able to obtain the minute you | :04:31. | :04:41. | |
through the powers, in this Bill. Can I thank the Home Secretary. We | :04:42. | :04:44. | |
know that their internet service providers are vulnerable, to | :04:45. | :04:55. | |
hacking. Some newspapers, not adverse to passing brown envelopes. | :04:56. | :05:00. | |
Is the Home Secretary satisfied that this can prevent, that hacking, | :05:01. | :05:07. | |
access to an individual's personal information? In relation to the | :05:08. | :05:15. | |
investigatory powers,, it sets out enhanced safeguards, for those | :05:16. | :05:24. | |
arrangements. As the honourable gentleman will know, issues of | :05:25. | :05:27. | |
inappropriate access to information have been a matter of court cases. | :05:28. | :05:32. | |
It is tightly correct that these matters are being accessed | :05:33. | :05:35. | |
criminally, that should be good with. What I have just set out, new | :05:36. | :05:42. | |
offences with this. Dealing with questions, or people obtaining | :05:43. | :05:47. | |
knowingly or recklessly, communications data. She will know | :05:48. | :06:00. | |
that I am a supporter of this. But does she have my concerns, looking | :06:01. | :06:04. | |
at international human rights, Imogen European crevasses, -- | :06:05. | :06:14. | |
emerging European privacy laws, even if this bill became an act of | :06:15. | :06:18. | |
Parliament, could she foresee any problems, internationally? The | :06:19. | :06:30. | |
honourable gentleman raises an important point. Many of the | :06:31. | :06:35. | |
internet service providers, based in other countries. One of the other | :06:36. | :06:42. | |
issues that we have been continuing to progress, discussions with the | :06:43. | :06:47. | |
United States authorities, about the Christian under which circumstances | :06:48. | :06:49. | |
it is possible to ensure that warrants issued there, can be | :06:50. | :06:55. | |
exercised across the United States. We are always have had territorial | :06:56. | :07:00. | |
jurisdiction, the previously pro-government that introduced the | :07:01. | :07:07. | |
legislation also establish that jurisdiction. It has never been | :07:08. | :07:10. | |
tested but we have that discussion with the united states. The Home | :07:11. | :07:17. | |
Secretary recently met with my constituents. Barry. 14-year-old | :07:18. | :07:28. | |
son, groomed online then murdered. Could the Home Secretary explain how | :07:29. | :07:37. | |
the bill would help prevent any similar cases? Absolutely tragic | :07:38. | :07:46. | |
case. I know the enormous distress that was caused. Not just by the | :07:47. | :07:57. | |
grooming. But other actions, that have taken place and is. What we are | :07:58. | :08:04. | |
doing with them this legislation, I think is ensuring that the | :08:05. | :08:09. | |
authorities, more enforcement, the police, will have powers to be able | :08:10. | :08:15. | |
to better investigate those sort of incidents. Sadly, the incident that | :08:16. | :08:28. | |
led to that date. Restricting the use of powers outside of the | :08:29. | :08:31. | |
legislation, for equipment interference. The police or | :08:32. | :08:36. | |
intelligence agencies, wishing to interfere with the smartphone, to | :08:37. | :08:40. | |
obtain vital evidence, I warrant would be required. And it also | :08:41. | :08:46. | |
responds to the recommendations of the Intelligence and Security | :08:47. | :08:53. | |
Committee, placing a statutory suspension, for other countries to | :08:54. | :08:55. | |
intercept communications of somebody and United Kingdom. No suggestion | :08:56. | :08:59. | |
that the agencies could use international relationships to avoid | :09:00. | :09:05. | |
the safeguards. And for the avoidance of doubt, to answer some | :09:06. | :09:12. | |
questions, I cultivate the territorial jurisdiction, I meant | :09:13. | :09:14. | |
extraterritorial destruction. The house is going to know that the | :09:15. | :09:19. | |
interception of community should, listening to a telephone, is one of | :09:20. | :09:25. | |
the most sensitive and intrusive capabilities available to more | :09:26. | :09:30. | |
enforcement. It is also one of the most valuable. Over the past | :09:31. | :09:34. | |
decades, interception has played a part in every top piracy, -- | :09:35. | :09:47. | |
priortity MI5 cases. In the interests of national security, | :09:48. | :09:50. | |
economic well-being the United Kingdom. Authorising warrants is one | :09:51. | :09:59. | |
of the most important means, by which the secretaries can hold | :10:00. | :10:03. | |
law-enforcement to account for their actions. We had accountable to the | :10:04. | :10:08. | |
host, through elected representatives to the public. But | :10:09. | :10:12. | |
part two is going to introduce an important new safeguards. As | :10:13. | :10:16. | |
Secretary of State, they will need to be satisfied that the activity is | :10:17. | :10:22. | |
proportionate. But in future, it cannot be issued until a decision to | :10:23. | :10:25. | |
issue it has been formally approved by the judicial Commissioner. This | :10:26. | :10:32. | |
will place a double what, organisation, preserving the vital | :10:33. | :10:35. | |
element of democratic accountability, but introduce | :10:36. | :10:37. | |
independent judicial authorisation. I am grateful to the honourable | :10:38. | :10:47. | |
lady. She may have seen a letter in today's Guardian from a number of | :10:48. | :10:52. | |
lawyers, which suggested that this legislation was intended to give | :10:53. | :10:56. | |
generalised access to electronic communications content. Which she | :10:57. | :10:59. | |
agree that that is the very thing which this Bill does not actually do | :11:00. | :11:05. | |
at all? And that the double lock mechanism is there as an assurance | :11:06. | :11:11. | |
that it doesn't happen. My right honourable friend is right, the | :11:12. | :11:14. | |
point about this Bill is that it will only be possible to access, to | :11:15. | :11:20. | |
intercept communications, under this dual authority, this double lock | :11:21. | :11:24. | |
that has been put into place, and it is not the case that the authorities | :11:25. | :11:28. | |
are looking for a generalised access to the contents of communications. I | :11:29. | :11:33. | |
thank my right honourable friend for bringing that to the attention of | :11:34. | :11:39. | |
the House. I will give way to my right honourable friend. As she | :11:40. | :11:46. | |
quite rightly says, should -- this is an important power but also a | :11:47. | :11:52. | |
very sensitive one. She exercised it about two and a thousand times a | :11:53. | :11:56. | |
year, about ten times a working day. How long does she take typically | :11:57. | :12:04. | |
over one of these decisions? It is impossible to put a time on it | :12:05. | :12:08. | |
because each decision differs. The amount of information that's | :12:09. | :12:12. | |
available, the type of case, the extent to which it we refer -- may | :12:13. | :12:17. | |
refer to a matter already being considered, so the amount of time | :12:18. | :12:20. | |
and give to each case is the amount of time necessary to make the right | :12:21. | :12:31. | |
judgment each case. -- to each case. There have also been cases where | :12:32. | :12:38. | |
police misconduct is alleged and intercept has been used, and | :12:39. | :12:41. | |
subsequently it has been hard to use that in the -- evidence in front of | :12:42. | :12:47. | |
a jury, particularly one in a coroner's court. Does she envisage | :12:48. | :12:51. | |
any change in relation to that, is she minded to put that on the face | :12:52. | :12:57. | |
of the legislation? He has raised an important point, he will be aware of | :12:58. | :13:00. | |
one particular case in recent years where this has been the case, | :13:01. | :13:05. | |
whether question of the admissibility of evidence at an | :13:06. | :13:09. | |
inquest has been an issue. This is a matter we are not putting on the | :13:10. | :13:13. | |
face of this Bill, it is a matter that was explored previously when | :13:14. | :13:16. | |
the closed material proceedings were in certain cases, but we are looking | :13:17. | :13:23. | |
actively at whether there are other means in which we can ensure that | :13:24. | :13:27. | |
the appropriate information is available when those sorts of cases | :13:28. | :13:34. | |
are being considered. And someone who also has signed thousands of | :13:35. | :13:37. | |
these warrants, I think I would have welcomed this judicial commissioner | :13:38. | :13:43. | |
having a look as well, and I congratulate my right honourable | :13:44. | :13:45. | |
friend on making this very significant came -- change. Does she | :13:46. | :13:51. | |
recall in the Bill, which additional commissioner who will only have the | :13:52. | :13:54. | |
powers to act in the same way that a judge might act in a case of | :13:55. | :14:00. | |
judicial review? Which means only overruling her if she is behaving in | :14:01. | :14:04. | |
some completely unreasonable way. Does she think that is necessary, | :14:05. | :14:08. | |
and should not accept that might be some value if age additional | :14:09. | :14:10. | |
commissioner disagrees with her in at least having a discussion which | :14:11. | :14:18. | |
covers broader principles of judgment and doesn't just base it on | :14:19. | :14:21. | |
the fact that she is somehow behaving in a way no reasonable man | :14:22. | :14:27. | |
or woman otherwise would. My right honourable friend, with a degree of | :14:28. | :14:31. | |
prescience, has referred to the next issue I was going to address. I was | :14:32. | :14:35. | |
going to point out that I know that some honourable and right honourable | :14:36. | :14:38. | |
members had scrutinised the language in the Bill and had raised exactly | :14:39. | :14:43. | |
this issue. I want to be clear about this. Under the Bill it will be for | :14:44. | :14:47. | |
the traditional commissioner to decide the nature and extent of the | :14:48. | :14:51. | |
scrutiny that he or she wishes to apply. And crucially I think I can | :14:52. | :14:55. | |
reassure honourable and right honourable members that | :14:56. | :14:57. | |
commissioners will have access to all of the material that was put the | :14:58. | :15:02. | |
Secretary of State. So the traditional commissioner will not | :15:03. | :15:05. | |
just be looking at the process but will actually be able to look at the | :15:06. | :15:09. | |
excessive -- proportionality of the warrant being proposed. I would like | :15:10. | :15:17. | |
to make a little progress... A little supplementary, if I may? It | :15:18. | :15:23. | |
is more than my life's worth not to give way to for my cube -- Home | :15:24. | :15:27. | |
Secretary! Sometimes the information is very simple, very limited. Will | :15:28. | :15:33. | |
the traditional commissioner have the ability to ask for more | :15:34. | :15:39. | |
information which has not gone before the Home Secretary, if he or | :15:40. | :15:43. | |
she, the Jewish additional commissioner really wishes to know a | :15:44. | :15:47. | |
bit more about this one, to check what has been put towards -- for the | :15:48. | :15:53. | |
Home Secretary? -- traditional commissioner. It is important that | :15:54. | :15:57. | |
the Secretary of State of age additional commissioner make | :15:58. | :16:01. | |
decisions on the basis of the same information being available. If the | :16:02. | :16:07. | |
traditional commissioner decides there is not sufficient information, | :16:08. | :16:10. | |
he or she would refuse that warrant. It would be open to the Secretary of | :16:11. | :16:15. | |
State to appeal to the investigatory Powers commissioner to look at that | :16:16. | :16:18. | |
particular one again, or it might be if it had been refused in that | :16:19. | :16:22. | |
circumstance that actually the Secretary of State would say | :16:23. | :16:28. | |
themselves, take the warrant back, put more information back and | :16:29. | :16:34. | |
resubmit that warrant. I will give way to the Scottish national | :16:35. | :16:43. | |
spokesman. On a point of clarification, regarding the letter | :16:44. | :16:46. | |
to the Guardian, is the honourable lady aware that what this letter is | :16:47. | :16:49. | |
taking issue with is bulk interception warrants and bulk | :16:50. | :16:54. | |
equipment interference warrants, which even the ISC said should be | :16:55. | :17:00. | |
removed from the Bill? I will come onto the issue of mock warrants, but | :17:01. | :17:04. | |
what was clear from the committee reports that came forward was that | :17:05. | :17:09. | |
the powers that are in this Bill are necessary. The ISC raised a question | :17:10. | :17:14. | |
the bulky equipment interception warrants. The Government has been | :17:15. | :17:18. | |
able to produce further information on all bog cases, following that. We | :17:19. | :17:22. | |
published some case studies, examples of how these powers would | :17:23. | :17:28. | |
be used. -- bulk cases. I will give way to the honourable lady. | :17:29. | :17:34. | |
Can I take her to the other end of the telescope on this matter, | :17:35. | :17:37. | |
because one of the concerns people have about a generalised access | :17:38. | :17:41. | |
point is not with the warrants, but with the notion that you can | :17:42. | :17:46. | |
separate out contact and content. But the idea that there would be | :17:47. | :17:52. | |
access to content date -- contact -- contact data, which would be blurred | :17:53. | :17:56. | |
with content data online. Does she accept there is a challenge Re: | :17:57. | :18:01. | |
separating contact and content data. It is not the same as a phone record | :18:02. | :18:04. | |
when you look at somebody's intimate correspondence. | :18:05. | :18:11. | |
I know this issue was -- Internet correspondence. | :18:12. | :18:14. | |
I know this issue was raised, and has been raised in relation to the | :18:15. | :18:19. | |
Internet connection records power. But it is absolutely possible, and | :18:20. | :18:23. | |
we have been talking at length with the companies, to be able to | :18:24. | :18:27. | |
separate in Internet connection records for example the device or a | :18:28. | :18:32. | |
website that a particular device has accessed, and not then go into the | :18:33. | :18:36. | |
content of whatever it is that is being looked at in relation to that. | :18:37. | :18:40. | |
It is very important that I make that clear, because when -- we're | :18:41. | :18:46. | |
not talking about looking at people's Web browsing history, | :18:47. | :18:50. | |
simply that initial of contact. Can I also say in relation to the | :18:51. | :18:56. | |
authorisation process we have been discussing in relation to questions | :18:57. | :19:01. | |
raised by my right honourable and learned member for Rushcliffe, but I | :19:02. | :19:05. | |
welcome the joint committees clear endorsement of the double knock | :19:06. | :19:10. | |
regime. And I have to say to members of this House that those who think | :19:11. | :19:13. | |
that the senior division should -- judiciary will simply rubber-stamp | :19:14. | :19:19. | |
decisions, have simply never with protest judges. The provisions have | :19:20. | :19:27. | |
also been tightened in response to pre-legislative scrutiny, in | :19:28. | :19:32. | |
response -- in regard to urgent warrants. If I may make a little | :19:33. | :19:37. | |
more progress. In urgent circumstances such as a fast-moving | :19:38. | :19:42. | |
kidnap investigation, a warrant can still come into force as soon as the | :19:43. | :19:48. | |
Secretary of State has authorised it, but if this -- commissioner | :19:49. | :19:54. | |
disagrees with the Secretary's decision, he can agree that all | :19:55. | :19:59. | |
material will be destroyed. The Bill also provides sufficient safeguards | :20:00. | :20:03. | |
for parliamentarians and lawyers' communications. In any case where it | :20:04. | :20:06. | |
is proposed to intercept parliamentarians' communications, | :20:07. | :20:10. | |
the Prime Minister would be consulted. As for legally privileged | :20:11. | :20:18. | |
communications, it can also -- only be accessed in specific situations. | :20:19. | :20:27. | |
Such as in the context of the loss of life. But of course members of | :20:28. | :20:31. | |
Parliament should not be above the law, and the procedure would ensure | :20:32. | :20:37. | |
that members -- we all recognise that. But in some of the most dodgy | :20:38. | :20:42. | |
regimes of which I was of course is not one, governments do intercept | :20:43. | :20:47. | |
communications of members of Parliament, so surely an extra | :20:48. | :20:50. | |
safeguard to be absolutely assured would be that the Speaker looked at | :20:51. | :20:56. | |
this as well. Why not? I heard his exchange with the Mr Speaker | :20:57. | :21:01. | |
earlier. I think the important extra safeguard being put in, there are | :21:02. | :21:08. | |
two, the first is on the face of the Bill that the Prime Minister will be | :21:09. | :21:10. | |
consulted, but also it has that double knock authorisation, so it is | :21:11. | :21:15. | |
the case that in future interception of anybody's warrant, including | :21:16. | :21:23. | |
members of parliament, should that be the case, will not just be | :21:24. | :21:28. | |
subject to the determination of a democratically elected individual | :21:29. | :21:31. | |
but will also be subject to the independent decision of the | :21:32. | :21:33. | |
judiciary, through the judicial commissioners. I think that is an | :21:34. | :21:42. | |
important safeguard. She was right to point to the patchy relationship | :21:43. | :21:47. | |
between the judiciary and governments of all colours, but I | :21:48. | :21:50. | |
think the Bill strikes the right balance. It strikes me as being | :21:51. | :21:55. | |
absolutely imperative, somebody who is democratically accountable this | :21:56. | :22:00. | |
House in the country, has almost the first say on whether these things | :22:01. | :22:04. | |
are going to be done. Perfectly right for a judge properly trained | :22:05. | :22:07. | |
to have an overdue asthma overview of it, -- but if we were to lose | :22:08. | :22:17. | |
this provision, that would be a retrograde step. I think we have got | :22:18. | :22:22. | |
the balance right, many people have said just have judicial | :22:23. | :22:25. | |
authorisation, some believe it should just be Secretary of State | :22:26. | :22:29. | |
authorisation. I think having the two we get that Democratic began -- | :22:30. | :22:37. | |
accountability. I will make some progress if I may, my honourable | :22:38. | :22:42. | |
friend may try again but I will make some progress because I wanted to | :22:43. | :22:47. | |
know to communications data. That is the who, when, where, and how of a | :22:48. | :22:54. | |
communication. Such communications data is vital to investigations | :22:55. | :22:57. | |
carried out by the police and security agencies. It has been used | :22:58. | :23:02. | |
and 95% of all organised crime prosecutions by the CPO, it is used | :23:03. | :23:07. | |
to investigate, understand and disrupt terrorist prompts -- plots, | :23:08. | :23:10. | |
it has played a part in the investigation of some very serious | :23:11. | :23:14. | |
crime cases, it can tie suspects and victims to a crime scene, proved or | :23:15. | :23:19. | |
disproved alibis, and it can help to locate a missing child or adult. | :23:20. | :23:23. | |
Part three and four of the Bill will therefore proved -- preserve this | :23:24. | :23:28. | |
power for the police and security agencies, but also provide strong | :23:29. | :23:33. | |
privacy safeguards. Requests for communications data will require the | :23:34. | :23:36. | |
approval of an independent designated senior officer. In | :23:37. | :23:43. | |
addition, requests by local authorities also require | :23:44. | :23:46. | |
authorisation by a magistrate, and requests by any public authority, | :23:47. | :23:50. | |
including the security and intelligence agencies, to identify a | :23:51. | :23:55. | |
journalist's source, will require the authorisation knowledge | :23:56. | :24:02. | |
additional commissioner. It doesn't make sense that were communication | :24:03. | :24:07. | |
takes place using social media communications applications, those | :24:08. | :24:10. | |
communications are currently out of reach. In respect of our -- online | :24:11. | :24:15. | |
child sexual exploitation, the absence of these records often makes | :24:16. | :24:20. | |
it impossible to identify abusers. Such an approach defies logic and | :24:21. | :24:24. | |
ignores the realities of today's digital age. So the only new power | :24:25. | :24:28. | |
in the Bill is the ability to acquire communications services | :24:29. | :24:32. | |
providers to retain Internet service connection records. I want to be | :24:33. | :24:40. | |
quite clear and reiterate what I said earlier, the Internet | :24:41. | :24:43. | |
connection records do not provide access to a person's full web | :24:44. | :24:49. | |
browsing history. It is a record of what Internet services, a device or | :24:50. | :24:54. | |
a person has connected to, not every web page they have visited. I am | :24:55. | :24:57. | |
pleased that the joint committee agreed with the Government on the | :24:58. | :25:01. | |
necessity of this power and concluded that on balance, there is | :25:02. | :25:04. | |
a case for Internet connection records as an important tool for law | :25:05. | :25:05. | |
enforcement. Is a indeed, the committee went | :25:06. | :25:21. | |
further, and said law enforcement should be able to investigate for a | :25:22. | :25:25. | |
wider range of purposes, that reflects the recommendations. I | :25:26. | :25:33. | |
generally don't much -- give way to the honourable gentleman. The joint | :25:34. | :25:40. | |
committee also wanted clarification, on what those records were, and I | :25:41. | :25:45. | |
would welcome the Home Secretary's students, that the capability was | :25:46. | :25:49. | |
available for the retention of those records. At at whose course? We have | :25:50. | :25:58. | |
clarified definitions, that was a point that was clarified not only by | :25:59. | :26:02. | |
the committee, but the science and technology committee. Also, add | :26:03. | :26:07. | |
looking at this particular issue, we have spent a long time, and continue | :26:08. | :26:11. | |
to spend a long time, discussing with the companies who will | :26:12. | :26:16. | |
potentially be subject to such notices, the technicalities. But | :26:17. | :26:20. | |
different companies operate in different ways, I reiterate the | :26:21. | :26:24. | |
point that I have made previously, that the government will reimburse | :26:25. | :26:29. | |
the operational cost that these companies will be subject to. As has | :26:30. | :26:37. | |
been cynically deviously. -- said previously. It is important, because | :26:38. | :26:45. | |
I support the Home Secretary's objectives, but then fell is going | :26:46. | :26:52. | |
to cost about 180 million. As she satisfied, that that would cover the | :26:53. | :26:57. | |
cost of implementation of such that skill? -- scale? The raised that | :26:58. | :27:13. | |
with me. We have been discussing in detail, issues about the technical | :27:14. | :27:18. | |
arrangements, for intimate detection to lawful record, but also that the | :27:19. | :27:24. | |
costs that the government is going to be prepared, as it is just now, | :27:25. | :27:33. | |
to provide for those costs. The Home Secretary has been very generous. We | :27:34. | :27:37. | |
welcome the improvements that have been made, but I hope the Home | :27:38. | :27:43. | |
Secretary received my letter, the concerns, because we think that the | :27:44. | :27:47. | |
technology capability notices, remain an earlier of uncertainty. -- | :27:48. | :27:54. | |
area. Despite the commitments that have been made from the dispatch | :27:55. | :27:58. | |
box, we need long-term certainty, regarding reimbursement of costs. | :27:59. | :28:03. | |
This would be central to the loving the court heard and legislation, fit | :28:04. | :28:13. | |
for a fast moving area of the economy. We need the still with as | :28:14. | :28:19. | |
quickly as possible. Can I reiterate, to my honourable friend, | :28:20. | :28:29. | |
100% of the compliance costs will be met by the government. She has asked | :28:30. | :28:33. | |
me to provide a long-term commitment, we have been clearer in | :28:34. | :28:37. | |
terms of the legislation, but it is not possible for one government to | :28:38. | :28:47. | |
buy into the hands of any future government. In addition, alongside | :28:48. | :28:53. | |
the codes of practice, I have at the request of the joint committee, | :28:54. | :29:00. | |
published by comparison, those set out by Denmark. And I have held | :29:01. | :29:07. | |
discussions, with united States communication providers, and we will | :29:08. | :29:11. | |
continue to work closely with them as we implement this. As a guarantee | :29:12. | :29:15. | |
of this, we have included a commitment that the Home Secretary | :29:16. | :29:18. | |
will report to Parliament on how the bill has been operating after six | :29:19. | :29:23. | |
years, if Parliament agrees it is the intention that the joint | :29:24. | :29:26. | |
committee of both houses will be formed after five years of the bill | :29:27. | :29:32. | |
receiving joint ascent, we can inform the Home Secretary's report. | :29:33. | :29:40. | |
Part five deals with increment. Such as computers, smartphones. I'm | :29:41. | :29:48. | |
bringing existing powers, and responding to the recommendations | :29:49. | :29:53. | |
made by David Anderson QC. It makes the use subject to the use of | :29:54. | :29:57. | |
warrants, approved by the judicial Commissioner. Honourable member is | :29:58. | :30:02. | |
well-known that not only are these available to more enforcement, but | :30:03. | :30:05. | |
vital to so much work. This capability is also used in | :30:06. | :30:14. | |
exceptional circumstances, most typically to identify missing | :30:15. | :30:25. | |
people. For example, when a child goes missing, and parents know the | :30:26. | :30:27. | |
passwords to social media, they should be able to use that. It makes | :30:28. | :30:31. | |
clear that they can be used to save lives. Nevertheless, intrusive, and | :30:32. | :30:38. | |
it must be limited. In future, all of this will require the approval of | :30:39. | :30:54. | |
the judicial Commissioner. Equipment interference wants me only be of | :30:55. | :30:58. | |
documentation service providers with the agreement of the Secretary of | :30:59. | :31:03. | |
State. Alongside these codes of practice, in response to | :31:04. | :31:06. | |
recommendations of the Intelligence and Security Committee, we published | :31:07. | :31:13. | |
a case, about how it can be used, and is more necessary than ever | :31:14. | :31:18. | |
before. Of course, limits to how much can be said about these | :31:19. | :31:23. | |
capabilities, without having an advantage given to criminals. For | :31:24. | :31:27. | |
that reason, intelligence agencies have provided more detail on this, | :31:28. | :31:36. | |
to the committee. Bulk powers are vital. They have played a | :31:37. | :31:44. | |
significant part in every major counterterrorism event, in each of | :31:45. | :31:51. | |
the seven plots stopped since November 20 14. Detecting 95% of | :31:52. | :31:58. | |
cyber attacks, identified by GCHQ. And they have enabled over 90% of | :31:59. | :32:04. | |
the targeted military operations, during the campaign in the south of | :32:05. | :32:12. | |
Afghanistan. Part six places these powers on a clear footing. In | :32:13. | :32:22. | |
future, bulk warrants will need to be issued by double lock. And it | :32:23. | :32:26. | |
would need to be for operational purposes, and an independent judge. | :32:27. | :32:43. | |
Although all liberal members will the Home Secretary agree, it is not | :32:44. | :32:50. | |
in fact prevent parliamentarians, Skip top by collection provisions, | :32:51. | :32:54. | |
or with communications data, or at internet connection records, that | :32:55. | :32:57. | |
could lead to result was being identified. A variety of responses | :32:58. | :33:05. | |
that I would give. She needs to know, that predominantly, bulk | :33:06. | :33:15. | |
powers, used for foreign usage. In the use of bulk powers, still that | :33:16. | :33:28. | |
doubletalk authorisation. It is subject to the same case, the | :33:29. | :33:36. | |
proportionality. Mr Speaker, part seven applies the same safeguards. | :33:37. | :33:41. | |
Information of this tape is already used by the security and | :33:42. | :33:44. | |
intelligence agencies, to keep us safe, and could be required under | :33:45. | :33:50. | |
existing powers, but it uses the seat detections, so that it is | :33:51. | :33:55. | |
always subject to strong safeguards, irrespective of how was required. I | :33:56. | :34:00. | |
have said that the privacy safeguards are part of this, and the | :34:01. | :34:04. | |
guarantors will be adhered to, the new investigatory Commissioner. The | :34:05. | :34:14. | |
Commissioner, who will hold, or her field judicial office, will oversee | :34:15. | :34:18. | |
a new body, bringing together existing responsibilities, the | :34:19. | :34:22. | |
interception of communication, and the Chief surveillance Commissioner. | :34:23. | :34:27. | |
The new powers Commissioner will be given an enhanced budget, and a | :34:28. | :34:31. | |
dedicated staff of inspectors, as well as technical experts and | :34:32. | :34:36. | |
independent advisers. They will have access to the agencies, and remit to | :34:37. | :34:41. | |
provide Parliament and the public with meaningful the assurance about | :34:42. | :34:46. | |
how it has been used. When somebody has suffered, as a result of serious | :34:47. | :34:54. | |
error, they can inform the victim, without the need to consult the | :34:55. | :35:00. | |
tribunal. It can award compensation, take other action and fuse | :35:01. | :35:07. | |
appropriate. I turn to part nine. That provides for request to be made | :35:08. | :35:13. | |
to internet service providers, for technical capabilities in order to | :35:14. | :35:17. | |
give warrants, and maintain the ability to provide communications, | :35:18. | :35:23. | |
let me be clear, this provision only maintains the status quo. It allows | :35:24. | :35:30. | |
law enforcement and security agencies to ask companies, to remove | :35:31. | :35:35. | |
encryption, that has been applied for on the behalf. It could not be | :35:36. | :35:43. | |
used to ask companies to do anything it is not reasonably practical for | :35:44. | :35:48. | |
them to do. Finally, alongside the bill, we have taken for the | :35:49. | :35:54. | |
recommendation made to develop an international framework, so that | :35:55. | :36:05. | |
international companies can do so, and we are in discussion. It is | :36:06. | :36:08. | |
drafted to accommodate any such agreement, any company call | :36:09. | :36:13. | |
operating, would not be subject to enforcement action through the | :36:14. | :36:18. | |
courts. Mr Speaker, this bill provides unparalleled transparency, | :36:19. | :36:26. | |
on the most robust safeguards, but it will also provide law enforcement | :36:27. | :36:30. | |
and intelligence agencies with the powers that they need to keep us | :36:31. | :36:35. | |
safe. Because it is important, it has been subject to unprecedented | :36:36. | :36:39. | |
levels of scrutiny, it has resulted in a bill that protects privacy and | :36:40. | :36:45. | |
security. It is truly world leading. I look forward to the revised bill, | :36:46. | :36:50. | |
receiving cheerful consideration, and I commend it to the house. The | :36:51. | :36:58. | |
question, the Bill be read a second time. Andy Burnham. I echo the | :36:59. | :37:10. | |
condolences, paid to the police officer, who lost his life on his | :37:11. | :37:15. | |
duties. Let me start with the principle, that I think we have | :37:16. | :37:20. | |
broad agreement. From those ventures, to these, from the party | :37:21. | :37:24. | |
to the security services, we have a consensus that the country needs to | :37:25. | :37:31. | |
update its laws in this area. If the police and security services are to | :37:32. | :37:34. | |
be given these powers, broad agreement that those powers be | :37:35. | :37:39. | |
balanced, with stronger safeguards for the public that previously | :37:40. | :37:42. | |
existed. That seems a good platform from which to start. This bill is | :37:43. | :37:53. | |
commonly seen, through the prism of terrorism, bucket is much more, if | :37:54. | :38:01. | |
you were the parents of a missing child, you would want the police to | :38:02. | :38:04. | |
have access to all the information to bring them to safety. This is | :38:05. | :38:14. | |
about the ability to locate missing children, preventing extremists, | :38:15. | :38:24. | |
creating hatred, and though defending the liberties that we all | :38:25. | :38:30. | |
enjoy. But we are some way, from finding a consensus, in the form | :38:31. | :38:35. | |
that this legislation should take. The months after I was elected, two | :38:36. | :38:46. | |
planes flew into the WTC in New York. 15 years since, we have always | :38:47. | :38:52. | |
been engaged in a frantic search, the right balance between privacy, | :38:53. | :38:57. | |
and collective security. As of yet, we have not managed to find out. The | :38:58. | :39:13. | |
arguments in this bill, the last Parliament, loom over the debate | :39:14. | :39:19. | |
today, as does the stand-off between Apple and the FBI. That is an | :39:20. | :39:25. | |
unhelpful backdrop to this debate, it suggests that it is in | :39:26. | :39:30. | |
reconcilable, a question of either or, choosing one or the other. I do | :39:31. | :39:36. | |
not fully that is the case. We all have an interest in maximising | :39:37. | :39:40. | |
individual privacy, and collective security. At the House of Commons, | :39:41. | :39:46. | |
the objective should be to give constituents both. Finding that | :39:47. | :39:51. | |
balance, it should be the task over the next nine months. The simple | :39:52. | :40:03. | |
fact, Britain needs a new law in this area. A great opposition, risks | :40:04. | :40:10. | |
sinking this, leaving the interim laws in place. To go along with | :40:11. | :40:15. | |
that, abdicate responsibility to the police, security services and most | :40:16. | :40:19. | |
importantly the public. I am not prepared to do that. Just as | :40:20. | :40:22. | |
importantly, it would leave the public with weaker safeguards, and I | :40:23. | :40:24. | |
am not prepared to do that. He rightly says that this bill will | :40:25. | :40:36. | |
help fight terrorism. Will he join me in welcoming these powers to | :40:37. | :40:41. | |
fight cyber crime and financial crime and join me to vote for it? I | :40:42. | :40:47. | |
won't be joining him in the lobby tonight because I don't believe the | :40:48. | :40:50. | |
bill is acceptable in its current form, as I will go on to explain. As | :40:51. | :40:56. | |
he will have heard from my opening remarks, I have broad agreement with | :40:57. | :41:01. | |
the objectives of the government and I do not seek to play politics with | :41:02. | :41:06. | |
the bill or drag it down and I hope you will find some assurance in | :41:07. | :41:15. | |
those words. I am grateful. His position doesn't sound particularly | :41:16. | :41:18. | |
persuasive or tenable cobber certainly to those outside this | :41:19. | :41:22. | |
place. I wonder what he thinks about the message it sends, from the | :41:23. | :41:30. | |
supposedly government in waiting, that instead of thrashing out the | :41:31. | :41:34. | |
detail when the bill goes to report, by abstaining this evening the | :41:35. | :41:38. | |
message will be clear of what the Labour Party things on this | :41:39. | :41:43. | |
important issue. I disappear entirely -- disagree. We will not | :41:44. | :41:47. | |
oppose it, we will be responsible. I recognise that the country needs a | :41:48. | :41:53. | |
new law but I also think that the government will is not yet worthy of | :41:54. | :42:00. | |
the support, because there are significant weaknesses in the bill. | :42:01. | :42:05. | |
I am not prepared, I am sorry, to go through the lobby tonight and give | :42:06. | :42:10. | |
his government a blank cheque. I want to see changes in the Bill, to | :42:11. | :42:14. | |
strengthen the bill, and when they listen they will earn our support | :42:15. | :42:20. | |
and that seems to me to be into highly appropriate and responsible | :42:21. | :42:25. | |
for an opposition party. The higher degree of consensus we can establish | :42:26. | :42:28. | |
behind the bill, the more we will create the right climate in the | :42:29. | :42:33. | |
country for its introduction. As the Home Secretary said, possibly create | :42:34. | :42:37. | |
a template that can be copied around the world, advancing the cause of | :42:38. | :42:42. | |
human rights in the 21st-century. The prize is great and that is why I | :42:43. | :42:47. | |
ask this side to work constructively towards it and why I will repeat | :42:48. | :42:53. | |
today that I don't think our mission is helped by misrepresentation. In | :42:54. | :42:58. | |
my view it is lazy to label this bill a snooper's charter or a plan | :42:59. | :43:05. | |
for mass surveillance. Worse, it is insulting to people who work in the | :43:06. | :43:08. | |
police and security services. It implies they choose to do the jobs | :43:09. | :43:12. | |
they do because they are busybodies who like to spy on the public rather | :43:13. | :43:18. | |
than serve the public. I don't accept that characterisation, it is | :43:19. | :43:23. | |
fair and it do ministry -- diminishes the difficult work they | :43:24. | :43:29. | |
do to keep us safe. I will give way. Thank you. Will he agree that the | :43:30. | :43:34. | |
three independent reviewers all agreed that our services | :43:35. | :43:39. | |
categorically don't carry out mass surveillance and work within the | :43:40. | :43:43. | |
boundaries of the legislation. I agree, and the idea that they might | :43:44. | :43:48. | |
do, that they have time to do that is fanciable -- fanciful. They go to | :43:49. | :43:53. | |
the people that they need to be concerned about and that is why I | :43:54. | :43:57. | |
reject the characterisation often placed on this legislation. What | :43:58. | :44:05. | |
does he make on the United Nations special member for privacy, who last | :44:06. | :44:10. | |
week criticised the bill, saying authorising this interception would | :44:11. | :44:16. | |
legitimise mass surveillance? We need to explore the plans in detail | :44:17. | :44:20. | |
as part of this bill. As I said, I don't accept that this is a plan for | :44:21. | :44:25. | |
mass surveillance but we need to work harder in the next nine months | :44:26. | :44:29. | |
to take those concerns are away. In a moment. With all of the concerns, | :44:30. | :44:36. | |
all of the points I have made, I have to say that there are concerns | :44:37. | :44:40. | |
that people have about this bill that are well founded. There is a | :44:41. | :44:46. | |
genuine worry, we just heard it, that providing for the accumulation | :44:47. | :44:50. | |
of large amounts of personal data presents risks to people's privacy | :44:51. | :44:56. | |
and online security. In a moment. There is a more specific worry, that | :44:57. | :45:02. | |
investigatory powers can be of -- abused and in fact have been in the | :45:03. | :45:07. | |
past. In recent years they have been revelations about how bereaved | :45:08. | :45:11. | |
families, Justice campaigners, environmental campaigners, | :45:12. | :45:15. | |
journalists and trade unionists have all been subject to inappropriate | :45:16. | :45:20. | |
police investigation. What justification could there ever have | :45:21. | :45:24. | |
been for the Metropolitan Police to put the noble Baroness Lawrence and | :45:25. | :45:29. | |
her family under surveillance? Although it has not been proven, I | :45:30. | :45:34. | |
know the Hillsborough strongly suspect that the same was done to | :45:35. | :45:38. | |
them. I give way to the honourable gentleman. I thank him. A lot of the | :45:39. | :45:46. | |
debate has been about looking into people's files. This should be about | :45:47. | :45:50. | |
victims, it should be about children who have been victims of crime. Has | :45:51. | :45:55. | |
he had any representations from most charities that wrecked -- represent | :45:56. | :45:59. | |
victims of crime and children's charities? I have had them, the | :46:00. | :46:06. | |
government has had them. This is about more than terrorism, it is | :46:07. | :46:11. | |
about giving the police and security services the tools they need to keep | :46:12. | :46:15. | |
us safe in the 21st-century. That is why I am not playing politics with | :46:16. | :46:22. | |
this bill. I actually take quite a careful and considered approach. But | :46:23. | :46:26. | |
the government has not yet done enough to earn my support. I have a | :46:27. | :46:31. | |
lot of respect for the honourable gentleman. Can I congratulate him on | :46:32. | :46:36. | |
what he said about rejecting the conspiracy theories about this being | :46:37. | :46:42. | |
a snooper's charter. A second reading of the bill is when you | :46:43. | :46:46. | |
agree or disagree with the principle of the bill. He has said he agrees | :46:47. | :46:50. | |
with the principle and there are many behind him, or in the Labour | :46:51. | :46:56. | |
Party, who agree with that. Surely the opportunity today is to vote for | :46:57. | :47:00. | |
the principal Bill at second reading and then scrutinise it upstairs. The | :47:01. | :47:04. | |
right thing would be to support the government tonight. I will let him | :47:05. | :47:10. | |
form his own view on the right parliamentary tactics but I will be | :47:11. | :47:14. | |
deciding that position and I say to him that I don't think I will be | :47:15. | :47:17. | |
serving the public simply to give the government a blank check this | :47:18. | :47:24. | |
evening. It is my job, wait a second, my job to hold them to | :47:25. | :47:31. | |
account, to protect the public as best I can through this bill, and I | :47:32. | :47:36. | |
am approaching the job of Her Majesty's opposition with the utmost | :47:37. | :47:44. | |
responsibility. Alongside bereaved families there have been cases of | :47:45. | :47:49. | |
journalists claiming material was inappropriately seized from them, | :47:50. | :47:53. | |
most recently in connection with the Plebgate affair. Last year a senior | :47:54. | :48:00. | |
police officer turned whistle-blower came to an event in Parliament and | :48:01. | :48:04. | |
said that he and a colleague had been involved in supplying | :48:05. | :48:08. | |
information that led to the blacklisting of construction | :48:09. | :48:13. | |
workers. For those who claim that these fears are exaggerated, I would | :48:14. | :48:16. | |
refer them to the biggest unresolved case of this kind, the 1972 National | :48:17. | :48:24. | |
building workers' strike and the convictions of 24 pickets known as | :48:25. | :48:30. | |
the Shrewsbury 24. It is widely believed that their prosecution was | :48:31. | :48:33. | |
politically orchestrated with the help of the police and the security | :48:34. | :48:38. | |
services. I will give way to somebody, my honourable friend who | :48:39. | :48:42. | |
knows a great deal and has been a champion of those fighting for | :48:43. | :48:48. | |
justice. I thank him and he mentions the Shrewsbury pickets, a stark | :48:49. | :48:52. | |
example of the misuse and abuse of state power, so therefore does he | :48:53. | :48:58. | |
agree that it is essential that there are the strongest possible | :48:59. | :49:01. | |
safeguards within the bill that would specifically make sure that | :49:02. | :49:07. | |
such historic injustices can never happen again, such as the | :49:08. | :49:12. | |
politically motivated incarceration of pickets in 1972? He puts it very | :49:13. | :49:20. | |
well and that is why fears about legislation of this kind, indeed on | :49:21. | :49:24. | |
these benches, because we know the truth of what happened, even though | :49:25. | :49:28. | |
it is not widely known by the public, because we have seen | :49:29. | :49:33. | |
documents in relation to it. I have here a memo from the security | :49:34. | :49:37. | |
services to a senior Foreign Office official. It is headed, secret, and | :49:38. | :49:46. | |
it talks about the preparation of a TV programme that went out about the | :49:47. | :49:50. | |
trial of the Shrewsbury pickets. At the top it says, we had a discreet | :49:51. | :49:54. | |
but considerable hand in this programme. That is from the security | :49:55. | :50:00. | |
services, so why wouldn't people on these benches fear the handing of | :50:01. | :50:05. | |
more power to the police and security services without there | :50:06. | :50:11. | |
being adequate safeguards? I am grateful. Before the honourable | :50:12. | :50:14. | |
member for wreaking intervenes, everything is being done perfectly | :50:15. | :50:23. | |
right but I advise the House that 48 backbenchers wish to contribute. | :50:24. | :50:27. | |
Those who have the floor or seek the floor might wish to take account of | :50:28. | :50:35. | |
that. I will be brief, but the Shadow Home Secretary is right to | :50:36. | :50:39. | |
point out where abuses have taken place but does he also recognise | :50:40. | :50:46. | |
that in this bill is a new offence of misusing communications data, | :50:47. | :50:50. | |
something he should welcome? I am going to come onto that very point, | :50:51. | :50:54. | |
but these are not historical matters because the convictions still stand | :50:55. | :51:00. | |
today. What I would say to him, and I pay tribute to his government, | :51:01. | :51:03. | |
because they have a good record on this, but we need to go further in | :51:04. | :51:08. | |
giving the full truth about some of the darkest chapters in our past so | :51:09. | :51:14. | |
we can learn from them and build the right safeguards into this | :51:15. | :51:17. | |
legislation. This bill will have failed unless it entirely rules out | :51:18. | :51:21. | |
the possibility that abuses of the kind I have mentioned could ever | :51:22. | :51:25. | |
happen again and that is the clear test I am setting for this bill but | :51:26. | :51:30. | |
also why I welcome the principle of it. It leaves behind the murky world | :51:31. | :51:36. | |
of policing in the 1970s, 80s and 90s and creates the possibility of | :51:37. | :51:42. | |
having an open framework that includes much improved safeguards | :51:43. | :51:48. | |
for ordinary people. We are far from that goal yet. It is clear that the | :51:49. | :51:51. | |
Home Secretary has been listening and has responded to the reports of | :51:52. | :51:56. | |
the three parliamentary committees but of the 122 recommendations in | :51:57. | :52:00. | |
the three reports the government has reflect dead less than half of them | :52:01. | :52:06. | |
in this revised bill. I say to the Home Secretary she will need to be | :52:07. | :52:10. | |
prepared to listen more and make further significant changes to the | :52:11. | :52:14. | |
bill if she is to achieve her goal of getting it onto the statute book | :52:15. | :52:20. | |
by December. Today I take the House through six specific concerns. The | :52:21. | :52:24. | |
first is on privacy. As I said at the beginning, people have a right | :52:25. | :52:28. | |
to want to maximise their personal privacy. Given the worries people | :52:29. | :52:33. | |
have about the misuse of data, the intelligence and to committee was | :52:34. | :52:38. | |
surely right to put privacy concerns at the heart of this bill. | :52:39. | :52:42. | |
Presumption of Agassi would provide the basis from which exceptional | :52:43. | :52:47. | |
powers are drawn. -- the presumption of privacy. It would ensure clarity | :52:48. | :52:56. | |
that any intrusions into it would require exceptional justification. | :52:57. | :53:01. | |
The Home Secretary said that privacy was hard-wired into the bill. I find | :53:02. | :53:05. | |
it hard to accept that statement from the changes that have been | :53:06. | :53:11. | |
made. I see them as more cosmetic changes and they have not directly | :53:12. | :53:14. | |
answered the concerns of the committee. I asked the government to | :53:15. | :53:20. | |
reflect further and include much stronger, overwrite Ching privacy | :53:21. | :53:25. | |
requirement as requested by the Intelligence and Security Committee. | :53:26. | :53:30. | |
Also on privacy, we do not yet believe the government has gone far | :53:31. | :53:34. | |
enough to protect the role of sensitive professions. The committee | :53:35. | :53:38. | |
noted that the safeguards for some professions must be provided right | :53:39. | :53:43. | |
across the bill Mamat what investigative repower is being used. | :53:44. | :53:47. | |
It is hard to see how that is being achieved at the moment. On MPs and | :53:48. | :53:53. | |
other elected representatives, there is a question as to why the bill | :53:54. | :53:56. | |
stops short of requiring the Prime Minister to rip -- to approve a | :53:57. | :54:02. | |
warrant and only be consulted upon one. It could be -- strengthened | :54:03. | :54:08. | |
there. On legal privilege, the Law Society have said they previewed -- | :54:09. | :54:11. | |
please do see the government has abolished legal and professional or | :54:12. | :54:14. | |
village they say it should be on the face of the bill, not just in the | :54:15. | :54:16. | |
codes. -- professional privilege. Relations between Members of | :54:17. | :54:35. | |
Parliament and whistle-blower out -- whistle-blowers, mammals of | :54:36. | :54:42. | |
Parliament and each other, they should all be protected. -- Members | :54:43. | :54:48. | |
of Parliament. It does need to be strengthened in respect of Prime | :54:49. | :54:51. | |
Minister real approval but also in the way he describes, to give | :54:52. | :54:56. | |
people, our constituents, that extra trust that if they come to speak to | :54:57. | :55:01. | |
us in our surgery they will be speaking to us and nobody else. I | :55:02. | :55:03. | |
give way. Matters of acute public concern, | :55:04. | :55:17. | |
whistle-blowers, does he think that one member of the government should | :55:18. | :55:24. | |
authorise that, and it should be revealed to the Prime Minister, | :55:25. | :55:31. | |
effectively his own court? It is at least arguable, some of scrutiny? I | :55:32. | :55:38. | |
think the Home Secretary indicated, there would be, because the decision | :55:39. | :55:45. | |
of the Home Secretary would also be applicable to the double lock. My | :55:46. | :55:50. | |
point, why should the Prime Minister only be consulted as part of that | :55:51. | :55:58. | |
process? It seems to me, a role for the Prime Minister to be approving. | :55:59. | :56:05. | |
Also, I question about journalists, and the National union believes it | :56:06. | :56:11. | |
has been weakening, clause 66 out the revelation of the process, with | :56:12. | :56:19. | |
regards to sources, and given the degree of trust that people need, | :56:20. | :56:33. | |
given that importance to democracy, to win the trust and support and | :56:34. | :56:41. | |
also the use of communications data, and internet connection records, to | :56:42. | :56:45. | |
intercept the equivalent interviewed inside the other. It is a real | :56:46. | :56:51. | |
concern, that the thresholds are either too, low, or too vague. The | :56:52. | :57:02. | |
Home Secretary, has previously described ICRs, as the phone bill, | :57:03. | :57:09. | |
that is the detection and prevention of any crime. But the joint | :57:10. | :57:14. | |
committee noted that is not a helpful description, ICRs will | :57:15. | :57:19. | |
reveal much more than an itemised telephone bill, revealing places | :57:20. | :57:26. | |
that people have visited. So the question, is it acceptable for this | :57:27. | :57:31. | |
level of personal information to be accessed, in relation to any crime, | :57:32. | :57:39. | |
anti-social behaviour, and motoring offences. I do not think so. And I | :57:40. | :57:52. | |
think a higher hurdle is needed. This is a critical question that the | :57:53. | :57:55. | |
government have to respond for. People believe that if ICRs become | :57:56. | :58:01. | |
sufficient, then it could be the potential for this to be must used. | :58:02. | :58:12. | |
They have two set stricter tests, for prevention of seedy as crimes, | :58:13. | :58:21. | |
missing people. That should be the case, and the other end of the | :58:22. | :58:24. | |
skill, the justification for using the most intrusive powers, national | :58:25. | :58:31. | |
security or economic well-being. I understand the need for operational | :58:32. | :58:34. | |
flexibility, but a long-standing concern that those tests are too | :58:35. | :58:41. | |
broad. Our feeling that national security has been used, to cover a | :58:42. | :58:47. | |
multitude of sins. And official papers, from that building work | :58:48. | :58:56. | |
straight, in 1972, still papers with field. How could that be justified? | :58:57. | :59:05. | |
Clearly, a point that is being brought up about proportionality. | :59:06. | :59:11. | |
Slightly odd. The bill itself mentions proportionality. It seems | :59:12. | :59:21. | |
odd. It is actually in the bill. I do not believe that it is. National | :59:22. | :59:36. | |
security, very broad term. It is not defined. Activities carried out in | :59:37. | :59:41. | |
the past, under the banner of national security. He would struggle | :59:42. | :59:46. | |
to justify as such. The problem with the economic well-being test, a | :59:47. | :59:52. | |
potentially opens up a much wider range of activities, it must only be | :59:53. | :00:02. | |
relevant, to national security. Just relevant, to national security. It | :00:03. | :00:09. | |
begs the question. What extra questions is the government want to | :00:10. | :00:15. | |
cover? It mentions a cyber attack, on London, surely that would be | :00:16. | :00:19. | |
covered anyway by National security. I put suggestions to the Home | :00:20. | :00:24. | |
Secretary. She accepts the joint committee invitation to define | :00:25. | :00:32. | |
national security, more explicitly, and secondly, if she were to do | :00:33. | :00:40. | |
that, the economic well-being test could be dropped altogether. That | :00:41. | :00:45. | |
means, now targeting of law-abiding trade unionist Ivory have seen in | :00:46. | :00:52. | |
the past. And ICRs themselves. The content, and the use. Suggesting, | :00:53. | :01:10. | |
that a judicial commissioner would, permit a politically motivated and | :01:11. | :01:20. | |
on trade union? I would gladly share papers I have of historic | :01:21. | :01:23. | |
injustices. Those convictions still stand. I also said earlier... | :01:24. | :01:34. | |
Revelations, that information supplied, to blacklist people in the | :01:35. | :01:38. | |
construction industry, came from the police and the security services. I | :01:39. | :01:49. | |
welcome the move. To codify all of this in law. But we do not want to | :01:50. | :01:54. | |
leave anything in doubt. Why should the most intrusive warrants, the | :01:55. | :01:59. | |
used on the taste of economic well-being? What does that mean? It | :02:00. | :02:04. | |
is national security alone that should intrude. I have been | :02:05. | :02:13. | |
listening carefully to my response, can I just push them, on the point | :02:14. | :02:18. | |
that was raised. I think this is very important. We are inserting the | :02:19. | :02:22. | |
judicial authorisation, of warrants, I did not think that any member of | :02:23. | :02:29. | |
this house should question their independence, it seems that the | :02:30. | :02:32. | |
right honourable gentleman is doing that. Good he is not doing that? Not | :02:33. | :02:44. | |
in any way. It is wrong to imply that I was. I am talking about the | :02:45. | :02:53. | |
grooms, one which her bill gives the police and security services, the | :02:54. | :02:56. | |
ability to put forward applications for once. If members would listen, I | :02:57. | :03:06. | |
am saying, those grounds should be as tightly defined as possible. I do | :03:07. | :03:10. | |
not think it helps, as she is proposing they can be brought | :03:11. | :03:15. | |
forward on proposals of genital economic well-being, because in the | :03:16. | :03:19. | |
past her party has taken a different opinion on that from a loss. It | :03:20. | :03:26. | |
opens away the range of potential cases, subject to the most intrusive | :03:27. | :03:33. | |
warrants. Fair and well made. I question to him, why did this not | :03:34. | :03:43. | |
occur to him on the 4th of November? He stood and said, having listened | :03:44. | :03:47. | |
carefully to the Home Secretary, I believe she has responded to | :03:48. | :03:51. | |
legitimate concerns, and got the balance correct. What has changed? | :03:52. | :03:56. | |
Has he been listening? I began by saying the very same thing. But I | :03:57. | :04:03. | |
think they are entitled, am I not, to raise some specific concerns, | :04:04. | :04:12. | |
with wording in the bill. And economic well-being. I believe that | :04:13. | :04:16. | |
could potentially come under that banner. I am telling the party | :04:17. | :04:21. | |
opposite, if they want my help, we need to get that definition correct. | :04:22. | :04:30. | |
Reassure the public. Is it not so, that millions of trade unionist 's | :04:31. | :04:34. | |
and many of my constituents, genuinely concerned about the | :04:35. | :04:45. | |
stretch of these powers, trying to bring those safeguards for work, it | :04:46. | :04:50. | |
is important that you scrutinise, so people have confidence in this? Puts | :04:51. | :05:04. | |
it very well. Trade unions and other campaigners have been subject to | :05:05. | :05:08. | |
inappropriate use of investigatory powers. If the party officer does | :05:09. | :05:14. | |
not understand that, they need to get the full truth. Have a different | :05:15. | :05:25. | |
feeling about legislation, they would probably find that they could | :05:26. | :05:31. | |
reassure people, and bring about a higher degree, of public support. I | :05:32. | :05:37. | |
am going to make progress. I was talking about ICRs. It is the worst | :05:38. | :05:49. | |
domains, visited, but not URLs. Not internet browsing history, just the | :05:50. | :05:54. | |
front door, but not where people went inside. That will provide | :05:55. | :05:59. | |
reassurance to people who think something more extensive. But the | :06:00. | :06:06. | |
definition remains extremely vague. I do not say anything to prevent | :06:07. | :06:09. | |
ICRs becoming more intrusive, as technology evolves. The code of | :06:10. | :06:14. | |
practice gives an illustration of what will be included, but does not | :06:15. | :06:20. | |
build confidence. Mr Speaker, I think it would help if the | :06:21. | :06:26. | |
government laid down I restricted definition, what could be included, | :06:27. | :06:34. | |
on the ICRs, on the face of this. Specifically, domains but not URLs. | :06:35. | :06:39. | |
The confusion is unhelpful, and it needs to be cleared up. It also sets | :06:40. | :06:47. | |
out far too wide a range of public bodies, able to access. It seems | :06:48. | :06:54. | |
that the net is far too wide. The Food Standards Agency, and the | :06:55. | :07:01. | |
Gambling Commission, to access somebody's record? Suspicion of | :07:02. | :07:08. | |
serious criminality, for the food chain, and the betting syndicate, | :07:09. | :07:12. | |
that would be better revealed to the police. We all want to see a much | :07:13. | :07:17. | |
reduced lost, until this part of the bill becomes acceptable. Bulk | :07:18. | :07:28. | |
powers. On this point of the ICRs, not only the keys that they are | :07:29. | :07:38. | |
poorly defined, but even in terms of a narrow approach, the government is | :07:39. | :07:43. | |
still proposing the retention of every website, visited by every | :07:44. | :07:50. | |
citizen, stored for 12 months. That principle is a very extensive power | :07:51. | :07:56. | |
given to the government. I would agree with the right honourable | :07:57. | :07:59. | |
gentleman. And if that was to be published, I think it would review | :08:00. | :08:02. | |
more about somebody, than an itemised telephone bill. That is | :08:03. | :08:08. | |
what the Home Secretary began by saying, that the same, it would | :08:09. | :08:13. | |
review what about somebody. To give indication, I would say that it is | :08:14. | :08:16. | |
not necessarily the one that information, it is to raise the | :08:17. | :08:20. | |
threshold, through which those records can be accessed. To make it | :08:21. | :08:26. | |
a test of serious crime, rather than any. I do not think that is | :08:27. | :08:33. | |
acceptable, to have information available for low-level offences. I | :08:34. | :08:38. | |
hope he would support me on that. It is also a fact that criminals, | :08:39. | :08:46. | |
terrorists, operating would use of righty of means, to cover the | :08:47. | :08:54. | |
tracks. I accept the argument me, that bulk form can be the only way | :08:55. | :09:00. | |
to identify those who pose a risk to the public. But some of it takes | :09:01. | :09:06. | |
investigatory work to new territory. Large quantities of new information, | :09:07. | :09:10. | |
from ordinary people, it prevents privacy concerns, and wants to need | :09:11. | :09:15. | |
fathers to be as targeted as possible. The case for these was | :09:16. | :09:21. | |
published, alongside the government, but it has failed to convince | :09:22. | :09:25. | |
everybody. And it is for the government still to convince people | :09:26. | :09:32. | |
that these powers are needed. I am sorry to backtrack. I have just | :09:33. | :09:40. | |
looked up the provision, in relation to economic well-being. It is | :09:41. | :09:43. | |
qualified. It not only reveals to the economic well-being, tied to the | :09:44. | :09:53. | |
interests of national security, relevant and economic well-being of | :09:54. | :09:56. | |
the United Kingdom, so as those are also relevant to the interests of | :09:57. | :10:02. | |
national security. National security element. And it is also qualified, | :10:03. | :10:10. | |
subsection five, referring to it only being implemented, when it is | :10:11. | :10:13. | |
considered necessary for the process of gathering evidence, using legal | :10:14. | :10:17. | |
proceedings in relation to information relating to axe, outside | :10:18. | :10:24. | |
the British Islands. It is a limited situation, and as a barrister, who | :10:25. | :10:30. | |
has presented a number of cases before judges, I think judges are | :10:31. | :10:37. | |
today looking at legislation, to consider these principles, perfectly | :10:38. | :10:38. | |
adequate. I thank her for the Lord tutorial | :10:39. | :10:48. | |
and I would say that maybe it is a point more for committee then second | :10:49. | :10:53. | |
reading. However, I did referred to the point she had made. The economic | :10:54. | :11:00. | |
well-being test is relevant to national security, it doesn't say | :11:01. | :11:07. | |
directly linked. Pupils face but I am sure I speak for everybody on | :11:08. | :11:11. | |
these benches when I say there is no room for ambiguity. -- she pulls a | :11:12. | :11:18. | |
face. They need to be absolutely clear about what they mean because | :11:19. | :11:23. | |
we have seen trade unionists targeted in the past on similar | :11:24. | :11:26. | |
justifications and we on these benches are not going to allow it to | :11:27. | :11:33. | |
happen in the future. He is looking to ask the Home Secretary to draft a | :11:34. | :11:37. | |
law that will include every provision, every change in | :11:38. | :11:41. | |
technology, in crime, in threat, over the next 50 or a hundred years. | :11:42. | :11:46. | |
The Home Secretary can't do that, which is why she has put in a system | :11:47. | :11:52. | |
of oversight, of proportionality and judicial checks and balances to give | :11:53. | :12:04. | |
the flexibility necessary for our nation to have security in a | :12:05. | :12:07. | |
changing world. I disagree. I am making a legitimate point that I | :12:08. | :12:13. | |
feel strongly about. I believe serious crime and national security | :12:14. | :12:18. | |
should be the strictly limited grounds on which the most intrusive | :12:19. | :12:22. | |
warrants are applied for and I would hope, in the spirit I have applied | :12:23. | :12:27. | |
today, he will approach it in a similar spirit and take away the | :12:28. | :12:31. | |
concern I have raised and understand why people here feel so strongly | :12:32. | :12:37. | |
about it. To pick up on the point made by the honourable and landed | :12:38. | :12:41. | |
Lady opposite, she talked about barristers presenting cases to | :12:42. | :12:45. | |
judges. Will the honourable member agree that under the double lock | :12:46. | :12:52. | |
section of this bill there will we know James Sayer and no proposer, it | :12:53. | :13:07. | |
will just be a... No gainsayer. There were very important concerns | :13:08. | :13:10. | |
raised about scope, oversight and indeed the more generic class | :13:11. | :13:16. | |
warrants. I don't believe they have been adequately answered. One of the | :13:17. | :13:19. | |
recommendations of the Joint Committee was that the government | :13:20. | :13:23. | |
should establish an independent review of all of the Balcombe powers | :13:24. | :13:28. | |
set out in the bill. Given the complexity of this, I think the | :13:29. | :13:32. | |
House would then fit from such a review so I specifically ask of the | :13:33. | :13:38. | |
Home Secretary that she does commission an independent review to | :13:39. | :13:41. | |
conclude in time for report and third reading on bulk powers. Our | :13:42. | :13:48. | |
fifth concern is judicial oversight. This was one of our earliest demands | :13:49. | :13:53. | |
on the bill. The government has given significant ground and the | :13:54. | :13:56. | |
bill is stronger as a result. We believe it could yet be stronger. | :13:57. | :14:02. | |
Currently the bill says that when deciding to approve a warrant a | :14:03. | :14:05. | |
commissioner should apply the same runcible is as would be applied by a | :14:06. | :14:10. | |
court on application for a judicial review. -- same principle. I have | :14:11. | :14:16. | |
said that this could mean a narrower test rather than -- which does not | :14:17. | :14:23. | |
look at the actual merits of an application. I was listening | :14:24. | :14:28. | |
carefully to her earlier and I thought I heard her provide | :14:29. | :14:33. | |
reassurance that a much broader consideration could be brought by a | :14:34. | :14:36. | |
judicial commission and I hope that is the case. If it is, why not | :14:37. | :14:41. | |
delete the judicial review clause from the bill to make it absolutely | :14:42. | :14:46. | |
clear that this is not just a double lock, this is an equal lock, where | :14:47. | :14:50. | |
the judicial commissioner has the same ability to look at the entire | :14:51. | :14:56. | |
merits of the case? Our sixth and final concern is about misuse of the | :14:57. | :15:01. | |
powers. I accept the concerns of the Police Federation that they need to | :15:02. | :15:05. | |
be safeguards for the collection of data in a lawful manner but I agree | :15:06. | :15:08. | |
with them that it needs to be clearer about the deliberate misuse | :15:09. | :15:15. | |
of powers, relating both to the obtaining of data and any use to | :15:16. | :15:20. | |
which it is subsequently put. Both should be a criminal offence and | :15:21. | :15:24. | |
that would provide an extra safeguard for the public. I have set | :15:25. | :15:29. | |
out six substantive issues that must in my view be addressed. Given the | :15:30. | :15:34. | |
seriousness of these concerns, people have questioned why we are | :15:35. | :15:36. | |
not voting with the government tonight. We not voting with or | :15:37. | :15:42. | |
against. The answer is, we need new legislation but this ill is not yet | :15:43. | :15:49. | |
good enough and that is why we have set the tests that we have. Simply | :15:50. | :15:52. | |
to block this legislation would in my view be responsible, it would | :15:53. | :16:00. | |
leave the police and security services in limbo and make their job | :16:01. | :16:04. | |
harder. We must give them the tools they need to do the job but if we | :16:05. | :16:08. | |
don't put new legislation on the statute book I believe we will leave | :16:09. | :16:13. | |
the public exposed to greater risk because they won't have the | :16:14. | :16:17. | |
safeguards in this bill. Let me be clear, there is no blank check here | :16:18. | :16:21. | |
for the government, we will not be voting for the bill because it is | :16:22. | :16:25. | |
some way from being good enough and if the government fails to respond | :16:26. | :16:30. | |
adequately to our concerns then I give notice that we will withdraw | :16:31. | :16:34. | |
our support for the timetabling of this bill. The public interest lies | :16:35. | :16:40. | |
in getting this right and not sacrificing quality to meet the | :16:41. | :16:44. | |
deadline. The time has come for this House to lay politics aside and find | :16:45. | :16:50. | |
that point of balance between privacy and security in the digital | :16:51. | :16:55. | |
age that can command broad public support. We on these benches have | :16:56. | :17:00. | |
worked hard to uncover the truth about some of the dark chapters in | :17:01. | :17:05. | |
our past, precisely so we can learn from them and make this country | :17:06. | :17:10. | |
fairer for those coming after us. I want to build that helps the | :17:11. | :17:14. | |
authorities do their job but protects ordinary people from | :17:15. | :17:17. | |
intrusion and abuse from those in power. I want Britain to be a | :17:18. | :17:22. | |
country that gives people privacy and collective security. Our shared | :17:23. | :17:27. | |
goal should be a bill that enhances security and democracy and with | :17:28. | :17:31. | |
goodwill on both sides I believe that is in our grasp. In light of | :17:32. | :17:37. | |
the extensive interest in this debate we shall need to begin with a | :17:38. | :17:42. | |
limit on backbench speeches of eight minutes. I give notice that almost | :17:43. | :17:47. | |
inevitably that limit will have to fall. I begin by calling the chair | :17:48. | :17:53. | |
of the Intelligence and Security Committee, the Member for | :17:54. | :17:59. | |
Beaconsfield, Mr Dominic Grieve. I am grateful for the opportunity to | :18:00. | :18:03. | |
participate in the debate and I want to summarise the views of the | :18:04. | :18:06. | |
Intelligence and Security Committee in relation to the legislation. We | :18:07. | :18:12. | |
published two reports on the matter and in addition, since we published | :18:13. | :18:16. | |
the second, the government and the agencies have provided us with | :18:17. | :18:19. | |
further evidence so I want to update the House. The present committee and | :18:20. | :18:24. | |
its predecessor are satisfied the government is justified in coming to | :18:25. | :18:28. | |
Parliament to seek in broad terms the powers the bill contains. None | :18:29. | :18:34. | |
of the categories of powers in the bill, including the principle of | :18:35. | :18:38. | |
having powers of bulk collection of data, which have given rise to so | :18:39. | :18:45. | |
much controversy, are either unnecessary or disproportionate to | :18:46. | :18:49. | |
what we need to protect ourselves. I go back to my intervention, that it | :18:50. | :18:55. | |
seems to me that certain individuals in this debate are labouring under a | :18:56. | :18:59. | |
false understanding of what the legislation is really about. We also | :19:00. | :19:03. | |
welcome the fact that the government has sorted this bill to provide much | :19:04. | :19:07. | |
greater transparency than previously. It is worth repeating | :19:08. | :19:15. | |
that Ripper was often income principle. The basic problem we face | :19:16. | :19:20. | |
is that by its nature the secret work of the agencies can't be | :19:21. | :19:24. | |
revealed in its detail without damaging or endangering their | :19:25. | :19:28. | |
capabilities. This requires a short is that the powers they have at a | :19:29. | :19:35. | |
contrast as far as any potential misuse is concerned. -- they have is | :19:36. | :19:47. | |
taken on trust. It is noteworthy that except in a few exceptions all | :19:48. | :19:55. | |
of these bodies have consistently given the investigatory powers given | :19:56. | :19:58. | |
by the agencies are clean bill of health. In my own role, I can say | :19:59. | :20:10. | |
that the agencies operate to high ethical standards, scrupulous in | :20:11. | :20:13. | |
confining their powers to legitimate purposes. I think it is very well | :20:14. | :20:20. | |
put into their DNA, as the previous head of GCHQ said, if he asked his | :20:21. | :20:24. | |
staff to do something unethical they would simply refuse. But that | :20:25. | :20:29. | |
environment produces its own problem. For those of us in the | :20:30. | :20:34. | |
bubble, our experience of the nature of the agencies' role makes us | :20:35. | :20:38. | |
complacent about the legitimate concerns of those outside it. Our | :20:39. | :20:48. | |
knowledge of our Power never having been used should not stop us from | :20:49. | :20:57. | |
controlling its potential abilities. It is important that we should | :20:58. | :21:01. | |
provide safeguards against such slippage. The recommendations we | :21:02. | :21:08. | |
made were intended to improve the legislation by trying to provide | :21:09. | :21:13. | |
that greater clarity, transparency and increase safeguards where we | :21:14. | :21:17. | |
thought possible. We are pleased that the government responded to | :21:18. | :21:23. | |
nine of our 22 recommendations, including three key ones. We | :21:24. | :21:26. | |
particularly welcome the provisions on safeguards to legal and | :21:27. | :21:33. | |
professional privilege but I suspect the matter can be looked at further | :21:34. | :21:37. | |
as the bill goes through committee. A number of our recommendations were | :21:38. | :21:42. | |
not excepted. We were disappointed that the bill doesn't include a | :21:43. | :21:48. | |
clear statement on overwriting privacy legislation. We except the | :21:49. | :21:52. | |
bill have safeguards we think they are piecemeal, so we think it is a | :21:53. | :21:58. | |
missed opportunity of providing that public assurance, even if the | :21:59. | :22:01. | |
practical nature of it wouldn't make a great deal of difference. The same | :22:02. | :22:07. | |
point applies to putting all of the powers and operations in one place. | :22:08. | :22:12. | |
The government has chosen to leave some powers elsewhere, we believe it | :22:13. | :22:16. | |
would have been helpful to put them all in this bill. There were three | :22:17. | :22:20. | |
significant issues. The first was our concerned that the procedures | :22:21. | :22:26. | |
for the examination of communications data were | :22:27. | :22:27. | |
inconsistent in respect of safeguards for the UK. There are | :22:28. | :22:32. | |
different routes brought obtaining such material and generally speaking | :22:33. | :22:37. | |
law enforcement agencies will accept it by a particular request to a | :22:38. | :22:44. | |
communication service provider. They can also be obtained by a GCHQ | :22:45. | :22:50. | |
interception capability as a by-product and in those | :22:51. | :22:53. | |
circumstances, although there are many safeguards about examining | :22:54. | :22:57. | |
content, there are not the same safeguards introspective the data on | :22:58. | :23:02. | |
its own. We thought that was inconsistent and might be changed. | :23:03. | :23:06. | |
The government has responded he had had -- help believe that it is | :23:07. | :23:08. | |
concerned it would make the burden to owners -- to onerous on | :23:09. | :23:17. | |
ministers. We think that matter can be addressed and we hope it can be | :23:18. | :23:20. | |
looked at again in the course of the passage of the bill. I give way. | :23:21. | :23:27. | |
Does he think by increasing the independence of judicial oversight | :23:28. | :23:30. | |
so the judges are much more clearly able to refuse a warrant, and that | :23:31. | :23:37. | |
might also -- increased public acceptance of these measures? This | :23:38. | :23:42. | |
is an area that doesn't currently have warranty, it has a specific | :23:43. | :23:46. | |
authorisation, and that is what we were looking for but we will listen | :23:47. | :23:50. | |
closely to what the government says about the problems that might pose. | :23:51. | :23:56. | |
The second issue concerns the way the capability is -- used, not in | :23:57. | :24:04. | |
the need for it. In particular we were not provided with evidence that | :24:05. | :24:08. | |
explained the need for this power as opposed to a targeted thematic | :24:09. | :24:12. | |
power. Following publication of our report we have friends -- then | :24:13. | :24:19. | |
received evidence from the agencies as to why they need warrants to | :24:20. | :24:24. | |
remain in the bill. They have made a persuasive case on this. More | :24:25. | :24:29. | |
importantly, the committee has been provided with reassurance that | :24:30. | :24:32. | |
information obtained by these means will be treated in exactly the same | :24:33. | :24:36. | |
way with exactly the same controls as with data acquired under | :24:37. | :24:42. | |
interception warrants. The committee therefore is broadly content that | :24:43. | :24:45. | |
there is a valid case for this power to remain in the bill. Just as with | :24:46. | :24:50. | |
intercept warrants, we would wish to see the safeguards and warrants | :24:51. | :24:55. | |
operated with detail and we hope to do that in the near future. Thirdly | :24:56. | :24:59. | |
we expressed concern about the process for authorising and | :25:00. | :25:03. | |
obtaining bulk of personal data sets. It is undoubted -- undoubtedly | :25:04. | :25:08. | |
necessary that the agencies have the ability to obtain these because they | :25:09. | :25:13. | |
can be vital in identifying subjects of interest, but they largely | :25:14. | :25:17. | |
contain private information on large numbers of people of no relevant or | :25:18. | :25:20. | |
legitimate interest in identifying subjects of interest, but they | :25:21. | :25:22. | |
largely contain private information on large numbers of people of no | :25:23. | :25:24. | |
relevant or legitimate interest to the agencies at all. | :25:25. | :25:30. | |
There is a concern and I have had many e-mails on this subject at the | :25:31. | :25:36. | |
net is being drawn to widely in respect of agencies like the Food | :25:37. | :25:41. | |
Standards Agency and the gambling commission and others that this | :25:42. | :25:43. | |
information could be misused and that is the kind of perception that | :25:44. | :25:50. | |
out there people do care about. I understand the honourable ladies | :25:51. | :25:53. | |
concern and that could be looked at. I have to say from what we saw the | :25:54. | :25:57. | |
agencies who do have access to this, we do not think Thatcher problem | :25:58. | :26:01. | |
should arise but it is a matter that the Home Secretary will wish to | :26:02. | :26:05. | |
respond to include course. Intrusive nurse needs to be considered as part | :26:06. | :26:10. | |
of the authorisation process and this was why we recommended it would | :26:11. | :26:16. | |
be done far better if class -based authorisations were removed from the | :26:17. | :26:18. | |
Bill and the requirement made that Mrs should authorise the retention | :26:19. | :26:24. | |
of each dataset. The government came back and suggested that should be | :26:25. | :26:29. | |
too onerous for ministers to do but we would suggest it could be met to | :26:30. | :26:34. | |
increasing the role of commissioners in renewing these orders and | :26:35. | :26:37. | |
amending the duration of the laws right stations which could be longer | :26:38. | :26:43. | |
than they are present -- authorisations. The point we were | :26:44. | :26:50. | |
driving at is it is right that ministers were constantly cited as | :26:51. | :26:54. | |
to what datasets were being obtained and we had an anxiety that in the | :26:55. | :26:57. | |
form of authorisation we have at present that might not always | :26:58. | :27:02. | |
happen. The committee is also raised a number of more minor concerns. | :27:03. | :27:05. | |
They are all set out in our report. They can be returned to a report of | :27:06. | :27:11. | |
the cannot be resolved in committee. I apologised that the time available | :27:12. | :27:15. | |
I can go through them all year. Some of them we are very pleased about. | :27:16. | :27:18. | |
Very pleased that decree with urgent warrants now being approved within | :27:19. | :27:22. | |
three days rather than the five days originally approved. The same can be | :27:23. | :27:36. | |
said of clause 134. There were however two more matters of concern. | :27:37. | :27:40. | |
We were troubled that we have not yet seen the actual list of | :27:41. | :27:43. | |
operational purposes which must underpin any draft or quadrant. It | :27:44. | :27:48. | |
goes to the very heart of this legislation. We have seen examples | :27:49. | :27:54. | |
which appear in Tywi Valley that we hope and expect the full list to be | :27:55. | :28:01. | |
supplied was before the Bill has completed its journey. The committee | :28:02. | :28:06. | |
should be able to refer any concern it has on the use of our | :28:07. | :28:09. | |
investigatory power to the investigatory Powers Tribunal on | :28:10. | :28:13. | |
behalf of Parliament. That would help to provide reassurance that | :28:14. | :28:16. | |
there was a mechanism though and just buy the complaint to do this. | :28:17. | :28:21. | |
Mr Speaker, the bills argue capable of further improvement but the | :28:22. | :28:24. | |
garment has listened, I will certainly be supporting the garment | :28:25. | :28:28. | |
on second reading. It is undoubtedly needed on the grounds of | :28:29. | :28:30. | |
national-security. It is well-intentioned but I said -- trust | :28:31. | :28:35. | |
that we should also be able to insure it fulfils the equally | :28:36. | :28:38. | |
important role of being an upholder of our freedom and liberty. Before I | :28:39. | :28:44. | |
begin on behalf of the Scottish National party I would like to | :28:45. | :28:47. | |
associate myself with the comments of the Home Secretary and the Shadow | :28:48. | :28:50. | |
Home Secretary regarding the death of the prison officer in Northern | :28:51. | :28:54. | |
Ireland and to extend the heartfelt condolences and sympathies of my | :28:55. | :28:58. | |
party to his family, colleagues and friends. The Scottish National party | :28:59. | :29:05. | |
joins with MPs from all parties in this house who have grave concerns | :29:06. | :29:10. | |
about many aspects of this bill. We do not doubt that the law needs a | :29:11. | :29:15. | |
thorough overhaul and we welcome the attempts to consolidate a number of | :29:16. | :29:19. | |
statutes in order to have a modern and comp offensive law. We also | :29:20. | :29:23. | |
recognise that security services and the police require adequate powers | :29:24. | :29:26. | |
to fight terrorism and serious crime. However such powers must | :29:27. | :29:32. | |
always be shown to be necessary, proportionate and in accordance with | :29:33. | :29:36. | |
the law. In particular, such powers must not impinge unduly on the right | :29:37. | :29:41. | |
to privacy or the security of private data and we feel that many | :29:42. | :29:46. | |
of the powers in this bill do not at this stage pass those tests. For | :29:47. | :29:51. | |
that reason in its current form the Scottish National party cannot give | :29:52. | :29:56. | |
Hezbollah. Or. We intended to join forces with others in this house to | :29:57. | :30:02. | |
have this bill as extensively amended as possible. Today we shall | :30:03. | :30:05. | |
be abstaining but if the bill is not amended to our satisfaction we | :30:06. | :30:09. | |
reserve the right to vote against it at a later stage. The bill is a | :30:10. | :30:15. | |
rushed job in my opinion coming on the back of a draft bill which did | :30:16. | :30:18. | |
not go far enough to protect certain liberties and lacked clarity. In | :30:19. | :30:24. | |
very recent weeks three Parliamentary committees have | :30:25. | :30:25. | |
expressed significant misgivings about many aspects of the draft Bill | :30:26. | :30:29. | |
and made very extensive recommendations for its revise all. | :30:30. | :30:33. | |
The Bill was published barely true winks after the ink was dry on the | :30:34. | :30:39. | |
last report. We believe there has been insufficient time for the | :30:40. | :30:43. | |
garment go back to the drawing board and rewrite the draft bill to deal | :30:44. | :30:46. | |
adequately with the concerns expressed by those three | :30:47. | :30:51. | |
Parliamentary committees. We were very concerned like other members in | :30:52. | :30:53. | |
this house to read last week that the United Nations special report on | :30:54. | :30:59. | |
the right to privacy concluded that other proposals in this bill fail | :31:00. | :31:03. | |
the benchmarks set in recent judgments of the European Court of | :31:04. | :31:06. | |
Justice and the European Court of Human Rights. Members opposite me | :31:07. | :31:11. | |
scoff but I invite them to read his report carefully, it contains a | :31:12. | :31:13. | |
careful excavation of recent case law and should not lightly | :31:14. | :31:16. | |
dismissed. The benchmarks of these recent cases provide surveillance | :31:17. | :31:21. | |
should be targeted and it should be targeted by means of warrants which | :31:22. | :31:24. | |
are focused on specific and raise reasonable suspicion yet under this | :31:25. | :31:31. | |
bill targeted interception warrants may apply to groups of persons or | :31:32. | :31:34. | |
more than one organisation or more than one premises. These bulk | :31:35. | :31:39. | |
interception warrants lack specification and there is no | :31:40. | :31:44. | |
requirement for reasonable suspicion, thus giving licence was | :31:45. | :31:47. | |
backlit if surveillance. The Shadow Home Secretary should questioned | :31:48. | :31:53. | |
whether we should be using the term mass surveillance but I wonder | :31:54. | :31:59. | |
whether the accurate term should be suspicion with surveillance and that | :32:00. | :32:01. | |
is a concern for civil liberties. Another aspect of the Bill is that | :32:02. | :32:07. | |
in relation to the National Security Council, an actual threat to | :32:08. | :32:10. | |
national security is not required and that concerns. The powers in the | :32:11. | :32:14. | |
Bill to retain Internet connection records and the bulk powers go | :32:15. | :32:18. | |
beyond what is currently offer right in other Western democracies and | :32:19. | :32:24. | |
thus could set a dangerous president and a bad example internationally. | :32:25. | :32:28. | |
The only other Western democracy which has authorised the retention | :32:29. | :32:31. | |
of materials similar to Internet connection records is Denmark and | :32:32. | :32:35. | |
they have subsequently abandoned their experiment having found it did | :32:36. | :32:41. | |
not yield significant benefits for enforcement. I see the Home | :32:42. | :32:43. | |
Secretary looking at me and I'm sure the she will argue there are | :32:44. | :32:47. | |
differences between her proposed scheme and the Denmark scheme. But | :32:48. | :32:50. | |
the devil is in the Peter Lambert listening we will need to look very | :32:51. | :32:53. | |
carefully in committee. The United States of America are rolling back | :32:54. | :33:01. | |
from data collection having found it to be in some cases unconstitutional | :33:02. | :33:05. | |
and of questionable value in fighting terrorism. So it is for | :33:06. | :33:09. | |
this government to justify weight alone requires to go such further | :33:10. | :33:14. | |
than the government in Western democracies. I do not believe such | :33:15. | :33:23. | |
operational cases that have been produced, they are more anecdotal | :33:24. | :33:29. | |
and hypothetical in nature. I give way to the honourable lady. If the | :33:30. | :33:35. | |
honourable lady thinks that it is important to look at international | :33:36. | :33:41. | |
comparisons, would she agree with me that the judicial authorisation | :33:42. | :33:44. | |
procedure that the honourable Secretary of State is proposing goes | :33:45. | :33:48. | |
further than other examples in Europe for example in Germany and | :33:49. | :33:55. | |
the Netherlands and in France? We need to compare apples with apples | :33:56. | :33:58. | |
and oranges with oranges. A more correct comparison is with | :33:59. | :34:02. | |
jurisdictions such as Canada and America which are more similar in | :34:03. | :34:07. | |
system to ours. I'll come back to that one I get to the issue of | :34:08. | :34:14. | |
authorisation. Everyone in this house I am sure once to get the | :34:15. | :34:18. | |
balance right between protecting civil liberties and giving the | :34:19. | :34:22. | |
security services and the police the necessary and proportionate powers | :34:23. | :34:24. | |
to fight serious crime and terrorism. However we believe in the | :34:25. | :34:28. | |
SNP at present that the government 's attempt has not got a balance | :34:29. | :34:31. | |
right. And we are looking forward to working with other parliamentarians | :34:32. | :34:35. | |
to try and get that important balance right. But we are worried | :34:36. | :34:39. | |
that the government is not giving suspicion -- sufficient right for | :34:40. | :34:46. | |
the Bill. The Bill is enormous. The 14 Home Office documents concerning | :34:47. | :34:49. | |
the Bill which were released to the parliament on the 1st of March | :34:50. | :34:54. | |
extend to 1182 pages. That is almost trebled the amount of material | :34:55. | :34:57. | |
released to the draft bill last November. And there is a suspicion | :34:58. | :35:00. | |
that the amount of material being policed in large tranches coupled to | :35:01. | :35:05. | |
relatively short timescales within which to consider and amend | :35:06. | :35:08. | |
proposals is an indication that the government does not really want the | :35:09. | :35:12. | |
Parliamentary scrutiny of this and we're determined to do our best to | :35:13. | :35:16. | |
make sure that there is sufficient Parliamentary scrutiny. Yes, I will | :35:17. | :35:21. | |
give way. Can I be absolutely clear about this? I have been in this | :35:22. | :35:24. | |
house long enough to see bills go through the house where codes of | :35:25. | :35:29. | |
practice should sit alongside the bill. And parliamentarians have | :35:30. | :35:32. | |
complained when government has failed to bring codes of practice to | :35:33. | :35:35. | |
the house at the very first age of the debate. This government has | :35:36. | :35:38. | |
brought those codes of practice to the house before secondary grading, | :35:39. | :35:43. | |
more than several days before secondary gain, precisely so that | :35:44. | :35:47. | |
members of this house have an opportunity to see them and consider | :35:48. | :35:49. | |
them alongside consideration for Bill. But the Home Secretary missed | :35:50. | :35:56. | |
and stands my complaint. It is not the fact that the material has been | :35:57. | :36:00. | |
produced, it is the fact that the material has been produced with a | :36:01. | :36:03. | |
timescale following thereon that is not sufficient for us to scrutinise | :36:04. | :36:07. | |
it properly. That is my complaint. I am going to make something | :36:08. | :36:11. | |
absolutely crystal clear before I go any further. And it is this. The | :36:12. | :36:16. | |
Scottish National party will not be morally blackmailed or bullied by | :36:17. | :36:23. | |
members of sit into blind support for a bill of dubious legality in | :36:24. | :36:26. | |
some respects and which seeks powers which go beyond other Western | :36:27. | :36:31. | |
democracies. We are not going to tolerate any suggestion that by | :36:32. | :36:35. | |
seeking proper scrutiny of the Bill and full justification for the | :36:36. | :36:40. | |
far-reaching powers, we are being soft on terrorism and serious crime. | :36:41. | :36:44. | |
And I would associate myself with the other main opposition party in | :36:45. | :36:48. | |
that respect. And I would also like to give you an example of why you | :36:49. | :36:52. | |
can be assured that the SNP is not soft on terrorism more serious | :36:53. | :36:55. | |
crime. We have been in government in Scotland for nine years and we have | :36:56. | :36:58. | |
shown ourselves to be a responsible government. Whilst issues of | :36:59. | :37:02. | |
national security are reserved, we have always cooperated closely with | :37:03. | :37:06. | |
the UK Government for example when Glasgow Airport was attacked by | :37:07. | :37:11. | |
terrorists in 2007. Our record in fighting crime in Scotland is second | :37:12. | :37:14. | |
to none. The Scottish Government has got recorded crime down to 41 year | :37:15. | :37:19. | |
low and we are committed to aggressive justice policy. We will | :37:20. | :37:23. | |
not stand accused of being soft on serious crime or terrorism because | :37:24. | :37:29. | |
it is simply not a fair statement. We confidently expect to be devising | :37:30. | :37:33. | |
a security policy of an independent Scotland and it will be a response | :37:34. | :37:36. | |
was guilty policy which will seek to work closely with near neighbours on | :37:37. | :37:40. | |
this Eli -- these islands but will also look to international models | :37:41. | :37:43. | |
from international democracies and strive to have a policy which takes | :37:44. | :37:49. | |
proper recognises of international human rights laws and the rule of | :37:50. | :37:53. | |
law. That is all we are about in our opposition and scrutiny of this | :37:54. | :37:57. | |
bill. And the concerns which we share about the concerns are not | :37:58. | :38:01. | |
just our concerns, they are shared by the party sitting round the and | :38:02. | :38:04. | |
many of the members opposite. They are shared by many of the members of | :38:05. | :38:10. | |
three Parliamentary midis, they are shared by NGOs, the technical | :38:11. | :38:12. | |
sector, eminent legal commentators, over 200 senior lawyers sign that | :38:13. | :38:17. | |
letter in the Guardian today. They are shared by can indication service | :38:18. | :38:23. | |
providers and they are shared by the UN special report Iran privacy. | :38:24. | :38:27. | |
Somebody shouts confidently from the others Oliver Howes at the 200 | :38:28. | :38:32. | |
lawyers + the letter in the Guardian are wrong. I suspect he had a look | :38:33. | :38:47. | |
at the list of names but sign that. Just the clarifications over the | :38:48. | :38:51. | |
honourable lady does not be seen to be speaking for my own party, would | :38:52. | :38:59. | |
she accept that the balances which the Secretary of State has outlined | :39:00. | :39:02. | |
in the bill today by a large are supported by people in Northern | :39:03. | :39:05. | |
Ireland simply because we have gone through the experience of terrorism | :39:06. | :39:11. | |
and know how important these kind of safeguards are for the general | :39:12. | :39:17. | |
public? I would always listen very carefully to what the honourable | :39:18. | :39:18. | |
gentleman is saying. apologise if I included him in a | :39:19. | :39:31. | |
sweeping statement but I do not agree that the judgment have got the | :39:32. | :39:36. | |
balance right. The point I'm seeking to make it is the job of responsible | :39:37. | :39:41. | |
opposition to oppose responsibly and to scrutinise but also to article | :39:42. | :39:47. | |
eight and inform public concerns and the public are concerned about this | :39:48. | :39:49. | |
and there is greater published origin but this bill than perhaps | :39:50. | :39:55. | |
there was last time round and I noticed that a survey of the public | :39:56. | :39:58. | |
commission by open exchange found that only 12% of the public believe | :39:59. | :40:02. | |
that the Home Secretary has adequately explain the impact of the | :40:03. | :40:06. | |
Bill to the UK public and present a balanced arguing for its | :40:07. | :40:08. | |
introduction. I suspect that is possibly a little bit unfair pinning | :40:09. | :40:12. | |
it all on the Home Secretary because it is the responsible job all of us | :40:13. | :40:15. | |
in this house to inform our constituents about this bill and | :40:16. | :40:16. | |
where it is going. I will make some progress for some | :40:17. | :40:29. | |
time being if you don't mind. I mentioned the letter to the | :40:30. | :40:37. | |
Guardian. I am conscious that the right honourable gentleman the | :40:38. | :40:41. | |
Attorney General has made his position clear but I respectfully | :40:42. | :40:46. | |
disagree with him. The letter to the Guardian from the lawyers focused | :40:47. | :40:49. | |
initially on the problem of bulk intercept. Even the interception of | :40:50. | :40:56. | |
Communications office, the independent watchdog, has said that | :40:57. | :41:02. | |
bulk intercept provides, I quote, generalised initial intercept. That | :41:03. | :41:06. | |
is the issue here, it is the generality that the lawyers are | :41:07. | :41:10. | |
worried about, the lack of focus and specificity. I am grateful. I take | :41:11. | :41:20. | |
the letter seriously because I regard it as a serious matter. If | :41:21. | :41:26. | |
indeed what was happening was what was set out in the first objection | :41:27. | :41:30. | |
by those writing it it would be a very serious matter in Bede, namely | :41:31. | :41:35. | |
that this House was sanctioning a system by which there was | :41:36. | :41:40. | |
generalised access to electronic communications in bulk. -- serious | :41:41. | :41:43. | |
matter in Bede. That is not actually what goes on and if one looks at the | :41:44. | :41:50. | |
bill clearly it is clear that that shouldn't be able to go on and we | :41:51. | :41:54. | |
would prevent it from happening if there were any possible risk of it. | :41:55. | :42:00. | |
We have been around this issue on many occasions and this is why, I | :42:01. | :42:04. | |
think, there is a difficulty of communication and understanding of | :42:05. | :42:08. | |
something that is fundamental to the way the agencies go about this work. | :42:09. | :42:15. | |
I can only reiterate that I and many others, including over 200 lawyers | :42:16. | :42:20. | |
who signed this letter, disagreed with him on this point. One of the | :42:21. | :42:26. | |
things that this issue illustrates is the importance of having very | :42:27. | :42:32. | |
focused language in bills dealing with such major matters of | :42:33. | :42:36. | |
constitutional importance, rather than having vague language that is | :42:37. | :42:40. | |
not properly understood and can at a later date be twisted by those it | :42:41. | :42:47. | |
suits to expand powers. That has happened in the past. I think we | :42:48. | :42:55. | |
should not dismiss too lightly the importance of the notion of the rule | :42:56. | :43:00. | |
of law overarching this bill. If the government really wants this | :43:01. | :43:04. | |
legislation to be world leading then it can't have legislation that | :43:05. | :43:08. | |
potentially violates international standards. As things stand the UK is | :43:09. | :43:14. | |
still bound by the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. There | :43:15. | :43:20. | |
are no proposals to withdraw from the fundamental human rights. We | :43:21. | :43:24. | |
await the proposals by the repeal of the Human Rights Act but the | :43:25. | :43:27. | |
government have been moving to reassure us that we will not be with | :43:28. | :43:37. | |
drawing from the court of Europe. Many people believe, many | :43:38. | :43:41. | |
distinguished lawyers, that if the bill is not significantly amended | :43:42. | :43:45. | |
then all of the UK will be on a collision course with those European | :43:46. | :43:52. | |
courts. An unamended bill could result in expensive litigation. It | :43:53. | :43:57. | |
could require Parliament to revise the law again in the future and this | :43:58. | :44:02. | |
should not be, provided we make sure that the law meets international | :44:03. | :44:08. | |
standards. I hear members asking, which parts? I will come to that. | :44:09. | :44:16. | |
Make intervention, don't be so rude. I would suggest that honourable | :44:17. | :44:22. | |
members opposite read the report that has come from the United | :44:23. | :44:27. | |
Nations report on privacy and consider the law here. They may | :44:28. | :44:32. | |
prefer to follow in the footsteps of Russia, which last December allowed | :44:33. | :44:37. | |
a law allowing its Constitutional court to decide whether to comply | :44:38. | :44:41. | |
with international courts but I would suggest Russia is not the best | :44:42. | :44:48. | |
role model for the UK. I want to challenge the premise that the more | :44:49. | :44:53. | |
privacy we sacrifice the more security we gain. This is not backed | :44:54. | :44:57. | |
up by the evidence. Some of the committees in this House have heard | :44:58. | :45:03. | |
evidence that swamping analysts with data can perhaps impede | :45:04. | :45:06. | |
investigation, because they are unable to find the needles in the | :45:07. | :45:11. | |
haystack of information. What we should be doing is looking at how to | :45:12. | :45:15. | |
increase security in an intelligent way and not blanket security Britain | :45:16. | :45:24. | |
men. The Home Office -- security retaining. The Home Office added one | :45:25. | :45:31. | |
word to the start of the bill as pertains to privacy but they have | :45:32. | :45:36. | |
not added any details or principles about overwriting principles of | :45:37. | :45:41. | |
privacy and I think their response to the Intelligence and Security | :45:42. | :45:45. | |
Committee seems somewhat cynical. I indicated that there are number of | :45:46. | :45:50. | |
aspects of the bilby SNP are concerned about. Time doesn't permit | :45:51. | :45:54. | |
to tackle all of them but there are four in particular and I endeavour | :45:55. | :45:59. | |
to keep my comments to a minimum bearing in mind I speak for the | :46:00. | :46:07. | |
third party in the House. The legal thresholds for surveillance, the | :46:08. | :46:10. | |
authorisation process, which the Shadow Home Secretary has talked | :46:11. | :46:13. | |
about, and the provision for collection of internet communication | :46:14. | :46:21. | |
records, and bulk powers. The legal thresholds for surveillance, | :46:22. | :46:24. | |
essentially what the government wants to do is really just wait for | :46:25. | :46:31. | |
Ripper's grounds, and we maintain they are unnecessarily broad and | :46:32. | :46:37. | |
vague. That is not just the concern of the SNP. The Joint Committee that | :46:38. | :46:41. | |
looked at this draft bill recommended that the bill should | :46:42. | :46:46. | |
include definitions of national security and economic well-being. | :46:47. | :46:51. | |
That has not been done. The Intelligence and Security Committee | :46:52. | :46:53. | |
recommended that economic well-being should be subsumed within a national | :46:54. | :46:59. | |
security definition and they said it is unnecessarily confusing and | :47:00. | :47:01. | |
complicated. These recommendations have been dismissed and the court | :47:02. | :47:08. | |
powers remain undefined and in my opinion dangerously flexible. On the | :47:09. | :47:14. | |
point of authorisation of warrants, we welcome the move towards greater | :47:15. | :47:18. | |
judicial involvement and we acknowledge that the government has | :47:19. | :47:22. | |
moved quite a long way towards the double lock but we would like to see | :47:23. | :47:28. | |
an equal lock, like the Shadow Home Secretary. Judicial review is not | :47:29. | :47:35. | |
the same as judicial authorisation. It provides the illusion of judicial | :47:36. | :47:40. | |
overview. I want to give concrete examples of that. The caselaw of the | :47:41. | :47:46. | |
United Kingdom Supreme Court shows that in civil proceedings which | :47:47. | :47:50. | |
don't relate to deprivation of liberty a less intense standard of | :47:51. | :47:55. | |
judicial is applied, more reasonable last than strictness city, and that | :47:56. | :48:00. | |
is why many fear this is what will happen if the bill is passed on | :48:01. | :48:07. | |
amending for -- unamended. -- reasonableness. Will she accept that | :48:08. | :48:15. | |
she is simply wrong on this point? The evidence to the Joint Committee, | :48:16. | :48:20. | |
of which I was a member come from Sir Stanley Banton, senior judicial | :48:21. | :48:27. | |
commissioner, and Lord Judge, senior surveillance Commissioner, were | :48:28. | :48:31. | |
clear that this had no place in this context. The wording is important, | :48:32. | :48:40. | |
involving necessity and proportionality. I think she is | :48:41. | :48:47. | |
cherry picking her way through the evidence that was heard. There was | :48:48. | :48:52. | |
evidence contrary to the position she has stated. There is debate | :48:53. | :48:57. | |
about this point, I accept, but the side of the debate I take is that | :48:58. | :49:02. | |
the review on traditional -- judicial review principles don't go | :49:03. | :49:08. | |
far enough. Why not have one stage judicial authorisation? It is the | :49:09. | :49:13. | |
norm in comparative jurisdictions, like as the states, Canada. Judicial | :49:14. | :49:20. | |
overview would encourage cooperation from US technology firms. I also | :49:21. | :49:28. | |
think there is a practical point. A 2-stage progress. Practically there | :49:29. | :49:37. | |
is a huge volume of surveillance warrants and it looks like there | :49:38. | :49:40. | |
will be an awful lot more as a result of this ill and it is | :49:41. | :49:44. | |
unsuitable for a small number of Cabinet ministers to deal with that. | :49:45. | :49:48. | |
I want to deal with something else that I think is a false premise that | :49:49. | :49:53. | |
is often put forward to justify ministerial involvement in the | :49:54. | :49:57. | |
issuance of warrants. Some people seek to argue that ministers are | :49:58. | :50:01. | |
democratically accountable, politically accountable for | :50:02. | :50:03. | |
surveillance warrants to this House, but I think that is misconceived. | :50:04. | :50:08. | |
Ministers are not really democratically accountable for their | :50:09. | :50:11. | |
role in issuing warrants because firstly the disclosure of the | :50:12. | :50:15. | |
existent of a warrant is criminalised and would remain so | :50:16. | :50:23. | |
under this bill. All of us no that requests for information concerning | :50:24. | :50:26. | |
such matters in this House are routinely carried with claims about | :50:27. | :50:30. | |
national security. I don't accept that ministers are practically, | :50:31. | :50:33. | |
politically or democratically accountable to this House in regard | :50:34. | :50:37. | |
to the issuance of warrants. Coming back to the jurisprudence of the | :50:38. | :50:41. | |
Strasberg court, it has been made clear that it is important to have | :50:42. | :50:47. | |
effective supervision by an independent judiciary and we want | :50:48. | :50:57. | |
the double lock standard. Moving to Internet connection records, we | :50:58. | :51:00. | |
agree with many others that the case the collecting these Internet | :51:01. | :51:03. | |
connection records, including its claimed benefit from law | :51:04. | :51:08. | |
enforcement, is flawed. It is not just my say-so. There are many | :51:09. | :51:13. | |
concerns across the industry am a people who understand the | :51:14. | :51:15. | |
technicalities far better than I do have explained the problems. The | :51:16. | :51:24. | |
telephone and the Internet is not like the telephone system. The | :51:25. | :51:29. | |
Internet connection can't be compared to a telephone bill. The | :51:30. | :51:38. | |
phone system consists of a set of records and if we are collecting | :51:39. | :51:42. | |
records of the phone system we can see that A called B and at what time | :51:43. | :51:48. | |
and the gyration of the call. The Internet is more like a mailbox that | :51:49. | :51:52. | |
Kalex packet of information and takes them from a to B. -- collects | :51:53. | :52:03. | |
packets. If you go onto the Facebook messenger service, it won't show who | :52:04. | :52:10. | |
you communicated with because that relates to a higher or lower level | :52:11. | :52:16. | |
of packets. It won't show the when, where and who that the government | :52:17. | :52:20. | |
say they want and they already get from phone records. What Internet | :52:21. | :52:25. | |
records will show is a detailed record of all of our Internet | :52:26. | :52:30. | |
connections for every person in the UK, a 12 month log of websites | :52:31. | :52:35. | |
visited, communication software used, system updates downloaded, | :52:36. | :52:40. | |
desktop widgets, every mobile app used and many other devices, baby | :52:41. | :52:49. | |
monitors, game consoles. That is quite fantastically intrusive and as | :52:50. | :52:54. | |
one of the honourable members for the Labour Party made the point | :52:55. | :53:00. | |
earlier, many public authorities will have access to these records, | :53:01. | :53:05. | |
including HMRC and the DWP and can access them without a warrant. Do | :53:06. | :53:10. | |
you really want to go that far? There are no other comparable | :53:11. | :53:13. | |
countries that have gone as far. David Andersson QC noted that such | :53:14. | :53:23. | |
procedures or obligations are not considered politically conceivable | :53:24. | :53:28. | |
in Germany, Canada or the USA so he said caution is in order. That deals | :53:29. | :53:36. | |
with Internet connection records. Coming to bulk powers. I have made | :53:37. | :53:44. | |
the point that even the interception of communication Commissioner 's | :53:45. | :53:47. | |
office says that bulk provides at the outset generalised intercept. We | :53:48. | :53:53. | |
only became aware of these interception programmes when they | :53:54. | :54:00. | |
were exposed by Edward Snowden. Whatever you think of those | :54:01. | :54:03. | |
exposures, at that time we became aware of them. This House has never | :54:04. | :54:08. | |
before debated on all voted on bulk powers so we are being asked to do | :54:09. | :54:12. | |
something very novel and challenging and we have to do it properly. The | :54:13. | :54:20. | |
power to intercept in bulk in the past was inferred from a vaguely | :54:21. | :54:25. | |
worded paper and that illustrates the danger of vaguely worded | :54:26. | :54:32. | |
legislation. Targeting bulk warrants in the telecommunications system, | :54:33. | :54:39. | |
our entire population, it is a radical departure from the common | :54:40. | :54:44. | |
law and human rights law but this is the approach that will be taken. In | :54:45. | :54:47. | |
many respects it is the most worrying part of the bill and the | :54:48. | :54:51. | |
part of the build that the UN said it was most concerned about. It is | :54:52. | :54:58. | |
very respectful of the tradition of the UK and makes some very good | :54:59. | :55:03. | |
point. It says it would appear that the serious and possibly unintended | :55:04. | :55:06. | |
consequences of legitimising bulk interception are not being fully | :55:07. | :55:10. | |
appreciated by the UK Government. Airing in mind the huge influence | :55:11. | :55:15. | |
that the UK legislation still has in over 25% of the UN member states as | :55:16. | :55:22. | |
well as the UK's proud tradition as a democracy, one of the founders of | :55:23. | :55:27. | |
human rights bodies such as the Council of Europe. The reporter | :55:28. | :55:31. | |
encourages the UK Government to take this golden opportunity to set a | :55:32. | :55:36. | |
good example and step act from taking disproportionate measures | :55:37. | :55:39. | |
which may have negative ramifications far beyond the shores | :55:40. | :55:44. | |
of the UK. It invites the UK Government to show greater | :55:45. | :55:47. | |
commitment to protecting the fundamental rights to privacy that | :55:48. | :55:52. | |
its own citizens and others and desist from setting a bad example by | :55:53. | :55:57. | |
imposing measures, particularly bulk interception and bulk packing, which | :55:58. | :56:03. | |
failed the standards of several Parliamentary committees and run | :56:04. | :56:07. | |
counter to the most recent judgments of the European Court of Justice and | :56:08. | :56:10. | |
of human rights and undermine the spirit of the right to privacy. | :56:11. | :56:32. | |
So, to conclude, Mr Speaker,... To conclude... I think she has made a | :56:33. | :56:49. | |
very good speech this afternoon and I think we should be working a | :56:50. | :56:52. | |
little harder on that side of the house to reach out and build | :56:53. | :56:56. | |
consensus but can I just invite her before she finishes to say whether | :56:57. | :57:01. | |
she will be supporting our call in committee to make Internet | :57:02. | :57:03. | |
connection records only accessible through I'll warrant based on | :57:04. | :57:08. | |
serious crime not any crime to give protection and also for a clear | :57:09. | :57:14. | |
definition of national-security question those are both issues which | :57:15. | :57:17. | |
we will work together with the Labour Party on. They have already | :57:18. | :57:21. | |
indicated that we intend to amend the bill extensively in committee. | :57:22. | :57:25. | |
We are very concerned about Internet connection records. We will look | :57:26. | :57:33. | |
seriously at proposals put forward by the parties and work together on | :57:34. | :57:37. | |
that and what I was gone to say in conclusion, Mr Speaker, was that the | :57:38. | :57:42. | |
SNP is in favour of targeted surveillance and we welcome the | :57:43. | :57:46. | |
double lock on the judicial authorisation and an improvement but | :57:47. | :57:49. | |
we do not think it goes far enough. Our concern is quite clearly that | :57:50. | :57:54. | |
many of the powers sought in this bill are of dubious legality and go | :57:55. | :57:57. | |
further than other Western democracies without sufficient | :57:58. | :58:03. | |
justification and it is fraught that reason in its current form we cannot | :58:04. | :58:06. | |
give the bill are current support. We will work with others to amend | :58:07. | :58:11. | |
the bill is extensively. Today we shall abstain but if the bill is not | :58:12. | :58:14. | |
amended to our satisfaction we reserve the right to vote it down at | :58:15. | :58:23. | |
a later stage. Mr Speaker, I think that is one of the most, Dave and | :58:24. | :58:27. | |
partisan speeches I have heard from a member of this house supporting an | :58:28. | :58:34. | |
abstention on the second reading of the bill for a very long time. And I | :58:35. | :58:40. | |
would urge the honourable lady and her Scottish National colleagues to | :58:41. | :58:43. | |
calm down a bit and accept that everybody is agreeing this is a | :58:44. | :58:47. | |
huge, hence if Bill. Its terms are quite often obscure. It is -- it | :58:48. | :58:54. | |
needs to have issues further addressed on committee and at later | :58:55. | :58:59. | |
stages. I think it is quite useful in this house to accept despite her | :59:00. | :59:04. | |
excellent speech, I have nothing against party time politics on the | :59:05. | :59:08. | |
right occasions, that there is an almost universal consensus in this | :59:09. | :59:14. | |
house at the moment and I am glad to say, about the principles that we | :59:15. | :59:17. | |
ought to be adopting and as I think the standards of liberal democracy | :59:18. | :59:22. | |
in this country are not too bad at the moment, we need a piece of | :59:23. | :59:25. | |
legislation which enshrines for the future in case eventually... The | :59:26. | :59:34. | |
principles are that we do wish to give the strong as possible support | :59:35. | :59:39. | |
to our intelligence policing authorities, to defend the national | :59:40. | :59:45. | |
interest and to defend our citizens from very real dangers in the modern | :59:46. | :59:50. | |
world and we must not left behind and I want our intelligence services | :59:51. | :59:53. | |
and the police services when they are dealing with terrorists, when | :59:54. | :59:58. | |
they are dealing with serious organised crime, drug trafficking, | :59:59. | :00:05. | |
human trafficking, and so on, child abuse, as people have said, I want | :00:06. | :00:10. | |
them to be as tough as anybody else's intelligence police services. | :00:11. | :00:13. | |
I want them to be as effective as they possibly can be and are | :00:14. | :00:19. | |
successful in avoiding risk, that is absolutely essential. Spies, | :00:20. | :00:26. | |
intelligence services, have had to do slightly odd things ever since | :00:27. | :00:29. | |
they first emerged on the scene, ever since they started steaming | :00:30. | :00:36. | |
open envelopes and started making interceptions of telephone calls. | :00:37. | :00:40. | |
But we must not be left behind by technology and we must not let | :00:41. | :00:45. | |
behind by modern society and the spies have got to act the same way | :00:46. | :00:49. | |
towards the Internet anyway they would act in towards envelopes in | :00:50. | :00:53. | |
the post for the last 200 years. I hope we are all agreed on that. I | :00:54. | :00:57. | |
hope we also accept that it does pose a dilemma for a liberal | :00:58. | :01:01. | |
democracy like our own because we have got a do this as well and as | :01:02. | :01:08. | |
toughly as anybody on the world at the highest ethical standards at the | :01:09. | :01:11. | |
same time not come from rising our underlying values the reason we want | :01:12. | :01:15. | |
are pleased to be so effective is we have we hope we hired -- the highest | :01:16. | :01:20. | |
standards of human rights, the highest regard for the rule of law, | :01:21. | :01:23. | |
democratic accountability and the thing we have maybe neglected most | :01:24. | :01:29. | |
in modern times, privacy, privacy of the individual. And we have recent | :01:30. | :01:34. | |
example is not in this area but of the abuse of the sea by the press | :01:35. | :01:40. | |
and others which we are only too well aware and our citizens expect | :01:41. | :01:44. | |
that there previously should only be intruded on any right cases. The | :01:45. | :01:48. | |
real heart of the test is to get the balance right which we all talk | :01:49. | :01:50. | |
about getting the balance right is the proportionality of very | :01:51. | :01:56. | |
intrusive powers which should only ever be used when the serious | :01:57. | :02:04. | |
national interest is threatened. Our security is at stake. And that... I | :02:05. | :02:17. | |
am sorry but if you have a matter of national-security and an acute | :02:18. | :02:21. | |
national crisis and the Home Secretary feels it is necessary to | :02:22. | :02:26. | |
authorise some snooping for want of a better word if you like, I am | :02:27. | :02:33. | |
sorry to use that word, the Home Secretary said earlier don't worry | :02:34. | :02:39. | |
the judge will authorise a door review it. And the Prime Minister | :02:40. | :02:45. | |
will consider it also. As... Judges are very resource of it either they | :02:46. | :02:49. | |
do not understand acute critical sensitivities. Should not somebody | :02:50. | :02:52. | |
like Speaker have some sort of oversight protect these very | :02:53. | :02:56. | |
valuable communications? I do not think I am persuaded. Do not totally | :02:57. | :03:02. | |
reject my honourable friend 's case actually because I was about to go | :03:03. | :03:06. | |
on and say we must realise are dangers in a democratic society via | :03:07. | :03:10. | |
our constantly vigilant about some future administration none that I | :03:11. | :03:12. | |
have ever experienced in opposition or in government actually abusing | :03:13. | :03:18. | |
this. There are Western democracies I think some things have happened in | :03:19. | :03:21. | |
America at times which would not approve of year where political | :03:22. | :03:27. | |
opponents, political rivals, have actually found the intelligence | :03:28. | :03:29. | |
services and other sources are being used against them. My honourable | :03:30. | :03:36. | |
friend recklessly suggested France. That would not surprise me. And the | :03:37. | :03:42. | |
modern politics, the tent and to do that is actually quite strong. The | :03:43. | :03:46. | |
other reason for actually insisting at this legislation is as tight as | :03:47. | :03:51. | |
we can make it is because it is all too easy to get accustomed to these | :03:52. | :03:55. | |
things. I have been Home Secretary and you are overwhelmed with | :03:56. | :03:58. | |
applications for warrants. The middle of the night doing a red box | :03:59. | :04:04. | |
and contrary to popular belief, I was conscientious about my red | :04:05. | :04:08. | |
boxes. You have got a very short time in which to make decisions | :04:09. | :04:11. | |
about things. There are vast number is of them. I used to make a point | :04:12. | :04:15. | |
of actually challenging one just to find out some more detail that | :04:16. | :04:19. | |
anybody was giving me in what came through. The volume is massive | :04:20. | :04:25. | |
compared with that I experience. That shows there is a danger in the | :04:26. | :04:31. | |
intervening 20 years the world has changed, so profoundly, so that I | :04:32. | :04:34. | |
suspect she has a vastly more of these cases to consider than I had. | :04:35. | :04:42. | |
I suspect some of them are much more difficult difficult matters of | :04:43. | :04:44. | |
judgment by most of the ones that I've faced and I found some even in | :04:45. | :04:47. | |
those days when we were less concerned about these concerns I | :04:48. | :04:51. | |
suspect that there were some pretty surprise in applications being made | :04:52. | :04:55. | |
if you actually went into what it was about. It is too easy even for | :04:56. | :04:58. | |
the best people in the intelligence services and I... I am sorry. It is | :04:59. | :05:08. | |
too easy for those in the intelligence service to get used to | :05:09. | :05:13. | |
this kind of power. It is too tempting to want to use them against | :05:14. | :05:17. | |
people who are causing trouble by making complaints or making leaks | :05:18. | :05:22. | |
and there have been examples of that and therefore that is what this bill | :05:23. | :05:29. | |
is about. Having said that, what my right honourable friend has brought | :05:30. | :05:33. | |
forward as a bill that makes the biggest advance forward that I can | :05:34. | :05:36. | |
remember for a generation of introducing this principle of | :05:37. | :05:42. | |
judicial involvement and judicial oversight for which I have the | :05:43. | :05:47. | |
highest possible respect and it is a quite dramatic change. We have also | :05:48. | :05:53. | |
strengthened the intelligence and Security committee 's powers and I | :05:54. | :05:56. | |
hope my right honourable friend will make the fullest use of those. But | :05:57. | :06:00. | |
Freddie is always faced with the problem it cannot have a debating | :06:01. | :06:05. | |
public, most of what is ever had done in private. We do need to get | :06:06. | :06:11. | |
this bill right and most of the points are not the big wide partisan | :06:12. | :06:15. | |
points but I was talking about a moment ago. They are actually in the | :06:16. | :06:20. | |
detail, the devil is in the detail and actually there are some quite | :06:21. | :06:22. | |
important points where we should still be questioning. There is a | :06:23. | :06:28. | |
vast amount of activity under the general title of economic | :06:29. | :06:31. | |
well-being, I have known some very odd things happening under that | :06:32. | :06:39. | |
head, national security can easily get conflated with the policy of the | :06:40. | :06:44. | |
government of the day and I do not know quite how you get the | :06:45. | :06:47. | |
definition right but it is no good just dismissing that point. Most of | :06:48. | :06:52. | |
my points are committee points. Several have been raised already. I | :06:53. | :06:57. | |
did not know that the judge had given his opinion to the select | :06:58. | :06:59. | |
committee that the Wednesbury test of reasonable lasso not provoke it. | :07:00. | :07:04. | |
He has an old opponent of mine in love courts I am an up-to-date and | :07:05. | :07:12. | |
extinct lawyer and he is a very distinguished and very recent riot. | :07:13. | :07:18. | |
As a movie if the judge things the Home Secretary is not following the | :07:19. | :07:22. | |
legal principles, but it is question is a judgment and abortion ideas are | :07:23. | :07:26. | |
most important of all to worry much most. But it is the one I feel more | :07:27. | :07:33. | |
strongly about. It was raised by the Shadow Home Secretary today. I am | :07:34. | :07:39. | |
worried by part three of the bill. The whole debate is conducted on the | :07:40. | :07:42. | |
basis we should all live fearful in our beds, this is dealing with | :07:43. | :07:48. | |
terrorism, this is dealing with child abusers, this is dealing with | :07:49. | :07:52. | |
human traffickers, actually vast numbers of people are getting | :07:53. | :07:57. | |
powers, part three all kinds of curious public bodies, every local | :07:58. | :08:03. | |
authority, county and district, where one official can get the | :08:04. | :08:07. | |
approval of one magistrate and access to huge amounts of | :08:08. | :08:09. | |
information. There is too much already. I'd doubt the wisdom of | :08:10. | :08:14. | |
that. I think we shall find other points that should be corrected the | :08:15. | :08:16. | |
process of this bill through this house. I associate myself with the | :08:17. | :08:22. | |
remarks of the Home Secretary earlier and others of heartfelt | :08:23. | :08:26. | |
condolences to the family and friends of the prison officer who | :08:27. | :08:29. | |
tragically lost his life in Northern Ireland. Mr Speaker, I will start | :08:30. | :08:33. | |
with the positive. Of course, I acknowledge and my colleagues | :08:34. | :08:37. | |
acknowledge this bill rubs and is progress in some very important | :08:38. | :08:40. | |
respects. It is far more competence of an area the previous piece of | :08:41. | :08:46. | |
legislation. Uncovers power is an avowed. It contains improvements in | :08:47. | :08:49. | |
accountability and it is said compared to its previous best jazz | :08:50. | :08:54. | |
predecessor eases -- easier to understand. However as the Home | :08:55. | :08:58. | |
Secretary who has just departed will know, she and I disgusted yesterday. | :08:59. | :09:03. | |
I am not a supporter of this bill, not for technical reasons but for | :09:04. | :09:05. | |
reasons principle which I will come to. We feel her department has not | :09:06. | :09:11. | |
responded in full to the criticism of the three Parliamentary | :09:12. | :09:13. | |
committees and it is therefore not yet in a fit state. There are many | :09:14. | :09:17. | |
problems that I would like to highlight to in particular. First as | :09:18. | :09:23. | |
the former Attorney General said, intelligence and security committee | :09:24. | :09:27. | |
was heavily critical of the way in which privacy protections were at | :09:28. | :09:32. | |
Titley -- article eight in the draft Bill. In responding to to the IFC 's | :09:33. | :09:37. | |
request for a new section dedicated holy to privacy the government has | :09:38. | :09:42. | |
in effect done little more than change one word in a title. They | :09:43. | :09:48. | |
have demonstrated precisely the point that the committee made one | :09:49. | :09:50. | |
needed describe the privacy protections in the bill as an | :09:51. | :09:56. | |
add-on. I share the committees concerns. The powers authorised by | :09:57. | :09:59. | |
this bill are formidable and capable of misuse. In the absence of a | :10:00. | :10:04. | |
written causation it is only the subjective tests of necessity and | :10:05. | :10:09. | |
proportionality that stand in the way that misuse. Bill should be far, | :10:10. | :10:15. | |
far more exquisite than it currently is that these powers are the | :10:16. | :10:19. | |
exception from standing principles of prisoners see and must never | :10:20. | :10:20. | |
become the norm. The Home Office appears to be | :10:21. | :10:30. | |
institutionally insensitive to the importance which should be attached | :10:31. | :10:35. | |
to privacy. A department that cared about privacy would offer more than | :10:36. | :10:40. | |
a one word response to the Intelligence and Security Committee. | :10:41. | :10:43. | |
It would not have quietly shelved the privacy and Civil Liberties | :10:44. | :10:48. | |
board which this House voted to establish just last year. It would | :10:49. | :10:56. | |
have examined more proportionate alternatives to storing every click | :10:57. | :11:00. | |
on every device of every citizen instead of leaping to the most | :11:01. | :11:04. | |
intrusive solution available. I will give way. What would he say about | :11:05. | :11:11. | |
the privacy of a victim of child abuse who was unable to find the | :11:12. | :11:20. | |
perpetrator of a crime because of the restrictions he wants to put on | :11:21. | :11:26. | |
this Bill? The greatest tools to go after such perpetrators are to match | :11:27. | :11:30. | |
the devices they use through IP addresses to them. That is why we | :11:31. | :11:35. | |
passed legislation which has been challenged in court by members of | :11:36. | :11:41. | |
this House and why in my view there are much more effective ways of | :11:42. | :11:46. | |
achieving that objective than this great dragnet approach being ad -- | :11:47. | :11:52. | |
advocated in this bill. Internet connection records, these are my | :11:53. | :12:01. | |
principal concern. We have been here so many times before, 2008, 2009, | :12:02. | :12:09. | |
2012. I can't think of another proposal in Whitehall that has been | :12:10. | :12:14. | |
so consistently champion, not by the police and intelligence services, | :12:15. | :12:19. | |
whose expertise I admire as anybody else, but by the Home Office, | :12:20. | :12:23. | |
despite failing to convince successive governments. That is not | :12:24. | :12:28. | |
wave -- the way that policy should be made. The Home Office said that | :12:29. | :12:37. | |
ICRs are significantly different from memos. The only difference I | :12:38. | :12:42. | |
can see is some restrictions on the purposes for which data can be | :12:43. | :12:45. | |
accessed, although I know some of them have been relaxed in clause 54 | :12:46. | :12:51. | |
of this draft. In terms of collection and retention the scheme | :12:52. | :12:55. | |
is the same. The name might be different but the scheme is the | :12:56. | :13:00. | |
same, service providers will be required to keep records of every | :13:01. | :13:04. | |
communication that takes place on their networks and potentially every | :13:05. | :13:08. | |
click where there is an exchange of data between your device and a | :13:09. | :13:13. | |
remote server. It is the Groveland of the days of steaming open | :13:14. | :13:18. | |
letters, somebody keeping the front of every envelope in the country in | :13:19. | :13:24. | |
some great warehouse being stored for 12 months. -- it is the | :13:25. | :13:30. | |
equivalent of the days. The implication is that the government | :13:31. | :13:34. | |
believes as a matter of principle that every innocent act of | :13:35. | :13:40. | |
communication online must leave a trace the future possible | :13:41. | :13:44. | |
interrogation by the state. No other country in the world feels the need | :13:45. | :13:50. | |
to do this apart from Russia. Denmark tried something similar but | :13:51. | :13:55. | |
abandoned it because the authorities were drowned in useless data, as | :13:56. | :14:00. | |
they would have drowned in useless envelopes many years ago. Australia | :14:01. | :14:06. | |
considered it but the police said it was disproportionate. Many European | :14:07. | :14:13. | |
countries have gone the other way, ruling pushing data retention powers | :14:14. | :14:16. | |
following the ruling of the European Court of Justice. -- relinquishing | :14:17. | :14:24. | |
data retention. The Home Office has produced a so-called case for | :14:25. | :14:30. | |
tracking Internet records but I would request that students of | :14:31. | :14:34. | |
politics and government would do well to study it. It is a model in | :14:35. | :14:39. | |
retrofitting evidence to a predetermined policy. Naturally it | :14:40. | :14:43. | |
sets out how this data could be useful to the police and | :14:44. | :14:48. | |
intelligence agencies. What it doesn't do and should is start from | :14:49. | :14:54. | |
the operation room, where lack of data is obstructing criminal | :14:55. | :14:56. | |
investigations, and explore different options for meeting that | :14:57. | :15:00. | |
need while balancing security and privacy. It is simply false to claim | :15:01. | :15:06. | |
that the dragnet approach is the only way to provide the government | :15:07. | :15:10. | |
with better tools to go after criminals, go after terrorists | :15:11. | :15:16. | |
online. We could incentivise companies to move to the new | :15:17. | :15:20. | |
industry standard for IP addresses at a much faster rate. It might | :15:21. | :15:25. | |
sound technical but it is important because it would at a stroke go a | :15:26. | :15:29. | |
long way to solving the key problem of how to tie IP addresses to | :15:30. | :15:39. | |
suspects. During my time in government I saw little sign that | :15:40. | :15:44. | |
the Home Office had devoted any serious consideration to | :15:45. | :15:49. | |
alternatives to ICRs. This is because it isn't a case of evidence | :15:50. | :15:54. | |
-based policy, it is a case of policy -based evidence. On top of | :15:55. | :15:59. | |
this we still don't know how it would work or be defined, the | :16:00. | :16:03. | |
Internet Service Providers Association have stated in their | :16:04. | :16:07. | |
briefing for this debate, in its attempts to future proof the bill | :16:08. | :16:11. | |
The Home Office has opted to define many of the key areas in such a way | :16:12. | :16:17. | |
that our members still find it difficult to understand what the | :16:18. | :16:20. | |
vocations will be for them. The costs of ICRs are still unclear. The | :16:21. | :16:26. | |
government estimate is just over ?170 million over ten years. The | :16:27. | :16:31. | |
same Internet service providers Association said the figure is not | :16:32. | :16:35. | |
one they recognise and BT say the cost will be significantly higher. | :16:36. | :16:39. | |
Internet connection records are at the heart of the bill, not just a | :16:40. | :16:45. | |
technicality but they are the principal heart of what information | :16:46. | :16:49. | |
is stored from all of us for long periods by the government in our | :16:50. | :16:54. | |
name. This dragnet approach will put us out of step with the | :16:55. | :16:58. | |
international community. There are practical problems with the proposal | :16:59. | :17:01. | |
and the terms used are still unclear. I would urge members on all | :17:02. | :17:06. | |
sides of the House to properly scrutinised this far reaching and | :17:07. | :17:10. | |
poorly evidenced proposal and withhold Parliamentary consent for | :17:11. | :17:14. | |
such a sweeping power until the questions I and others have raised | :17:15. | :17:21. | |
are properly addressed. Any bill that fundamentally affects B Aleix | :17:22. | :17:26. | |
and ship between the citizen and the state is bound to be controversial. | :17:27. | :17:44. | |
-- affect the relationship. Although Article eight interferes with the | :17:45. | :17:52. | |
rights to be protected by it, Parliament has a particular duty to | :17:53. | :17:55. | |
examine -- examine closely legislation of this sort which is | :17:56. | :18:04. | |
the -- to make sure that the Lord and -- the agencies are not asking | :18:05. | :18:11. | |
for too much. We hear the words necessity and proportionality | :18:12. | :18:13. | |
frequently in this bill and that is not an accident. Much of what was | :18:14. | :18:19. | |
said today will have been said in previous debates and that | :18:20. | :18:24. | |
legislation will be incorporated into this bill. We have had to adapt | :18:25. | :18:29. | |
bills to cope with the ability of those who wish to do us harm more | :18:30. | :18:38. | |
quickly and effectively and to avoid being able to intervene -- into fear | :18:39. | :18:45. | |
with the citizen. As far ago as the 14th century Parliament outlawed | :18:46. | :18:50. | |
eavesdropping but in recent years the intrusion into the private lives | :18:51. | :18:53. | |
of others by the use of illegal listening devices, the human airport | :18:54. | :19:02. | |
electronic devices, has been a topic for debate. -- the human ear or | :19:03. | :19:07. | |
electronic devices. Nobody doubts that the agencies need to intercept | :19:08. | :19:14. | |
crime and terrorism. The threat to our country and its interests is as | :19:15. | :19:19. | |
serious as it has been since the Second World War and the capacity of | :19:20. | :19:29. | |
the criminal underworld or national enemies to traffic in people or do | :19:30. | :19:36. | |
other things has been hugely increased. So much of what we have | :19:37. | :19:47. | |
to content with now is unseen, unheard, instantaneous and | :19:48. | :19:50. | |
undetectable. It gets more and more difficult to stay ahead of criminal | :19:51. | :19:54. | |
gangs and terrorists who have access to sophisticated systems that can be | :19:55. | :19:59. | |
today -- operated from an iPhone anywhere in the world. Does he agree | :20:00. | :20:07. | |
that to help the police and security services transfer what they do in | :20:08. | :20:13. | |
the physical world to the digital world they need help and we are | :20:14. | :20:17. | |
asking them to do that with one hand tied behind their back. I do agree. | :20:18. | :20:26. | |
I wholeheartedly support the aims and policy behind the bill. What is | :20:27. | :20:30. | |
proposed in terms of enabling the state to intercept communications or | :20:31. | :20:35. | |
interfere with equipment in a way that without this legislation would | :20:36. | :20:38. | |
be unlawful is sensible. The requirement for the Secretary of | :20:39. | :20:41. | |
State to issue warrants that have to be approved by the judiciary with | :20:42. | :20:49. | |
regard to the collection and retention of communications data are | :20:50. | :20:53. | |
rightly in the bill. The ability to acquire bulk data is necessary, the | :20:54. | :21:00. | |
checks and balances referred to in schedule four are right, scheduled | :21:01. | :21:07. | |
-- subject to further consideration. All of this and more are justified | :21:08. | :21:11. | |
and defensible in the interest of protecting us from harm but there is | :21:12. | :21:17. | |
no room for complacency that what is set out in the bill is the perfect | :21:18. | :21:22. | |
answer to a difficult set of problems, most obviously defined as | :21:23. | :21:26. | |
the border between public protection and excessive state power. In my | :21:27. | :21:29. | |
time as a law officer from time to time I had to deal with the security | :21:30. | :21:34. | |
services and law enforcement agencies and without being accused | :21:35. | :21:40. | |
by hope of Anju naivete my experience was that they were | :21:41. | :21:44. | |
scrupulous to a bay the will of Parliament and the law. From the top | :21:45. | :21:47. | |
down there was a genuine desire to do not only what was right and seek | :21:48. | :21:52. | |
clarification where the law was capable of being misconstrued so | :21:53. | :21:55. | |
that they did not stray across the line between what was possible and | :21:56. | :22:01. | |
what was lawful. I am sure that those entrusted with the work | :22:02. | :22:04. | |
described by this will will conduct themselves within the law and that | :22:05. | :22:07. | |
if errors are made it will not be from want of trying to keep on the | :22:08. | :22:13. | |
right side of the law. The number of intercepts warranted every year by | :22:14. | :22:17. | |
Secretary of State may not be many compared to the billions of e-mails | :22:18. | :22:20. | |
sent, mobile calls or Internet searches every year. Secretaries of | :22:21. | :22:30. | |
State will collectively issue fewer than 5000 every year but if the law | :22:31. | :22:35. | |
is to be obeyed everyone must be considered by the Secretary of State | :22:36. | :22:40. | |
or a Scottish minister. Every application will have to be given | :22:41. | :22:49. | |
for a warrant for intercepting the time it needs. The current holders | :22:50. | :23:01. | |
of these offices are hard-working minister is capable of reading the | :23:02. | :23:06. | |
closely argued brief late at night after a long day of working in their | :23:07. | :23:09. | |
departments either in Parliament or travelling here or overseas but even | :23:10. | :23:14. | |
if I have overestimated the number of applications they will receive I | :23:15. | :23:18. | |
am reasonably sure they will be considering several every day, much | :23:19. | :23:23. | |
reinforced by what my honourable friend had to say a moment or go -- | :23:24. | :23:30. | |
or so ago. Some applications will be more straightforward than others but | :23:31. | :23:34. | |
I don't expect that even the easier cases it will be a case of skim | :23:35. | :23:39. | |
reading the application and initialling it. Each application | :23:40. | :23:43. | |
must be fully argued on its own facts and considered personally -- | :23:44. | :23:47. | |
personally by the Secretary of State. I hope the tale will be gone | :23:48. | :23:55. | |
into about why the warrant is necessary, not least is it will have | :23:56. | :23:59. | |
to be carefully reviewed by ay judicial commissioner. This is even | :24:00. | :24:03. | |
more true in urgent cases where it follows the issuing of a warrant or | :24:04. | :24:08. | |
involves legal privilege under clause 20 five. My concerns about | :24:09. | :24:12. | |
the practicalities of this are added to when one considers the point | :24:13. | :24:18. | |
raised by my honourable friend, because they are likely to be | :24:19. | :24:23. | |
numbered in the hundreds of files every year and they are to be | :24:24. | :24:27. | |
authorised by what to my eyes look like a middle ranking police | :24:28. | :24:31. | |
officers and other officials. As one can see from schedule four, these | :24:32. | :24:41. | |
are inspectors and superintendence and others of that rank. Some of | :24:42. | :24:47. | |
them would be part timers. I need to be sure that the necessity or | :24:48. | :24:51. | |
expedience of every case will not outweigh the need for formality and | :24:52. | :24:54. | |
proper scrutiny of every application. If we are to have | :24:55. | :24:59. | |
complete confidence in the vetting system, I urge the Minister on the | :25:00. | :25:02. | |
front bench and the rest of the government to think very carefully | :25:03. | :25:08. | |
about these aspects of this process. Finally, clause 222 requires the | :25:09. | :25:14. | |
Secretary of State to rip -- prepare a report after five and half years | :25:15. | :25:19. | |
of the passing of the act. On any view, that is too long. I suggest it | :25:20. | :25:23. | |
should be done after two years and if the government refuses to reduce | :25:24. | :25:28. | |
that I hope the Member for Beckham feels and the ISC as well as Mr | :25:29. | :25:33. | |
David Anderson, the independent reviewer, will produce -- who | :25:34. | :25:35. | |
produced an invaluable report last summer kill --, will want to do so | :25:36. | :25:38. | |
themselves. There's often a comment made about | :25:39. | :25:49. | |
how long political events go one because not everybody has said | :25:50. | :25:53. | |
everything that been said. I want to speak of a member of the science and | :25:54. | :26:00. | |
technology select committee, Parliament's geek squad, and raise a | :26:01. | :26:04. | |
third set of concerns about this set of legislation. Members have talked | :26:05. | :26:09. | |
about questions of proportionality and concerns about the balance | :26:10. | :26:15. | |
between security and liberty. The challenges of extra generous | :26:16. | :26:17. | |
directional legislation and whether we in a global world can make | :26:18. | :26:22. | |
national laws that make sense. I want to add concerns about the | :26:23. | :26:26. | |
technical aspects of this legislation and whether it will | :26:27. | :26:31. | |
work. Whether this is legislation for digital natives comfortable with | :26:32. | :26:36. | |
the world or whether it has been defined by digital refugees who run | :26:37. | :26:40. | |
away from the reality of modern technical advances. All of us have | :26:41. | :26:46. | |
had the experience of trying to explain to a person under the age of | :26:47. | :26:51. | |
20 we were not able to Google our homework when we were at school. | :26:52. | :26:55. | |
Many may have jumpers older than the internet. It has fundamentally | :26:56. | :27:01. | |
changed our lives. A third of divorcees contain references to | :27:02. | :27:05. | |
Facebook which only came into our lives in 2007 but has transformed | :27:06. | :27:14. | |
that most personal of relationship. When we think about legislation that | :27:15. | :27:18. | |
takes account of these modern technologies it must be legislation | :27:19. | :27:23. | |
that understands those technologies and the consequences of the changes | :27:24. | :27:26. | |
in the law we are talking about making. When we are the committee | :27:27. | :27:30. | |
looked at the question of surveillance and internet connection | :27:31. | :27:36. | |
records concerns arose. Particularly the idea of a dragon it could be | :27:37. | :27:43. | |
brought together to bring together internet connection records for | :27:44. | :27:48. | |
everything go member of the population for 12 months and what | :27:49. | :27:53. | |
that might entail. There is a fundamental challenge between the | :27:54. | :27:58. | |
idea it is possible to separate out somebody's contact online from their | :27:59. | :28:02. | |
content. It is a definition many companies have raised a concern with | :28:03. | :28:07. | |
and this legislation has not completely grappled with it. The | :28:08. | :28:13. | |
legislation makes a distinction between IP addresses and people | :28:14. | :28:17. | |
knowing who you have contacted and what it called anything else that | :28:18. | :28:21. | |
might reasonably be expected to give the meaning of the communication. A | :28:22. | :28:26. | |
definition that makes sense when we talk about phone records but that | :28:27. | :28:30. | |
has to talk about the world to come not the one before. If I send a | :28:31. | :28:34. | |
message through Outlook you do not have to know the content to know it | :28:35. | :28:39. | |
is a message to request a meeting with somebody. When we talk about a | :28:40. | :28:45. | |
website someone has visited, that talks about content, for example if | :28:46. | :28:55. | |
it was an alcohol website it brings contents definition. We need to | :28:56. | :29:01. | |
challenge these definitions so we need a much tighter definition of | :29:02. | :29:05. | |
what it means to have an internet connection record and what will be | :29:06. | :29:10. | |
held on aggregate. It is something that all three committees have | :29:11. | :29:14. | |
called for. It is not something we are stealing from the government | :29:15. | :29:20. | |
about understanding that in this modern world the distinction between | :29:21. | :29:24. | |
content and contact is not a viable one. It needs to be much tighter in | :29:25. | :29:28. | |
this legislation because if not the question about who can access that | :29:29. | :29:33. | |
information leads into can access the meaning of those content | :29:34. | :29:41. | |
combinations. Those labourers questions will only become more | :29:42. | :29:45. | |
stark. I can see a few digital refugees querying what the internet | :29:46. | :29:50. | |
of things and, it is the growing number of physical things connected | :29:51. | :29:54. | |
online. I was given a coffee maker that I can set of using my mobile | :29:55. | :29:59. | |
phone. It is wonderful to be able to sit in bed and order several cups of | :30:00. | :30:06. | |
coffee. We have air bikes in cars online, burglar alarms online, | :30:07. | :30:12. | |
people may sit there and electricity online, forms of contact that are | :30:13. | :30:22. | |
accessible through digital media. All of that form of contact is | :30:23. | :30:26. | |
potentially information that could be created in an internet | :30:27. | :30:30. | |
communication record, information that could potentially be very | :30:31. | :30:35. | |
useful in an investigation. If you looked at somebody's electricity | :30:36. | :30:42. | |
use... Isn't the point with the internet connection record you are | :30:43. | :30:47. | |
looking for a past history for a future crime? Is it not relevant if | :30:48. | :30:52. | |
you're investigating a child abuser or terrorist to see their past | :30:53. | :30:57. | |
records and if they have accessed sites with relevant material, which | :30:58. | :31:03. | |
you would be able to see from the contact information? I am not sure | :31:04. | :31:06. | |
of the point he is making because nobody is suggesting you would not | :31:07. | :31:12. | |
want to access this information but to separate out contact from content | :31:13. | :31:16. | |
is much more difficult than the Home Secretary is suggesting so we need | :31:17. | :31:22. | |
much more honesty about the powers they are proposing that our police | :31:23. | :31:25. | |
and investigatory authorities may have. If you can get information | :31:26. | :31:30. | |
about my electricity meter, if you want to look at the contact between | :31:31. | :31:36. | |
me and my electricity meter, if I was doing it a lot you might wonder | :31:37. | :31:40. | |
what I was doing in my home that requires a lot of heat, drug | :31:41. | :31:44. | |
enforcement agencies may look at that. That brings with it content | :31:45. | :31:49. | |
about what you are doing. It does not mean we do not need methods for | :31:50. | :31:56. | |
accessing that. What is missing is an honesty about the technical | :31:57. | :31:59. | |
complications that will come with that. We need to be able to address | :32:00. | :32:09. | |
this. Perhaps I can reassure her the Home Secretary emphasised that we | :32:10. | :32:13. | |
continue to have discussion with the providers for the reason she has | :32:14. | :32:17. | |
described. It is essential that what we oblige them to do they can do. | :32:18. | :32:23. | |
The member for Sheffield Hallam gave the game away and said that the bid | :32:24. | :32:28. | |
tiddly overtime security services and the police have requested the | :32:29. | :32:31. | |
ability to do this work and the simple reason is they need to in the | :32:32. | :32:38. | |
interests of protecting us all. I am grateful to him for acknowledging | :32:39. | :32:42. | |
that the idea that one can always separate out contact from content | :32:43. | :32:47. | |
data is not viable so we need a much more honest debate about who will be | :32:48. | :32:52. | |
able to access that information and under what circumstances and that is | :32:53. | :32:55. | |
something I hope to see in the committee stage because the fact we | :32:56. | :33:00. | |
cannot justify to our constituents that their content data may be | :33:01. | :33:04. | |
accessed however inadvertently is something we have to address. The | :33:05. | :33:12. | |
question about honesty about encryption, concerns about the bill | :33:13. | :33:17. | |
and how it might affect encryption, that many of the technology | :33:18. | :33:22. | |
companies are very concerned about. The bill talks about giving the | :33:23. | :33:25. | |
Secretary of State the power to serve technical capability of | :33:26. | :33:29. | |
disease and being able to require companies to remove their electronic | :33:30. | :33:33. | |
protection but the clarity about what that means that what protection | :33:34. | :33:37. | |
there is in terms of encryption technology themselves and what that | :33:38. | :33:41. | |
might mean for other consumers of services is not clear that as a | :33:42. | :33:47. | |
concern for many. We know encryption is a vital part of security for | :33:48. | :33:55. | |
services. Ashley Madison, talk talk, hospitals did not have security | :33:56. | :33:59. | |
measures in place. We are talking about whether and not the government | :34:00. | :34:02. | |
is going to require those companies to in those bags or opportunities | :34:03. | :34:08. | |
for accessing information. We have to see stronger scrutiny of what | :34:09. | :34:12. | |
that encryption process means because of we are looking at | :34:13. | :34:17. | |
removing some of those encryption requirements that creates a security | :34:18. | :34:21. | |
risk and we have to be honest with the public that that is the choice | :34:22. | :34:27. | |
this government is making. Security of data. This government in 2009 | :34:28. | :34:33. | |
dropped about turning back the surveillance state but in this | :34:34. | :34:36. | |
legislation they are privatising the databases they said they did not | :34:37. | :34:43. | |
want seeing developed. It is not clear about the security of this | :34:44. | :34:47. | |
data. We know that having to hold everybody's internet records for a | :34:48. | :34:53. | |
year will be honeypots to hackers unless security processes are in | :34:54. | :34:58. | |
place. The fact the government has not clarified who will pay for the | :34:59. | :35:02. | |
security, what a reasonable cost is, how disputes will be, leaves open a | :35:03. | :35:09. | |
gap that not only hackers but consumers will be interested in as | :35:10. | :35:13. | |
well. The government has to be clear about how would make sure it | :35:14. | :35:17. | |
protects consumers from having information hacked as a result of | :35:18. | :35:20. | |
requiring these companies to gather this data. Similar concerns about | :35:21. | :35:25. | |
bulk interference and the encouragement data. There are | :35:26. | :35:31. | |
questions about the proportionality of this legislation. Questions about | :35:32. | :35:36. | |
the judicial extent of this legislation and overseas. Concerns | :35:37. | :35:42. | |
about the technology. We have to be able to answer questions on all | :35:43. | :35:45. | |
three of these to be satisfied this is appropriate for the 21st-century. | :35:46. | :35:50. | |
I hope to see amendments that will address these issues within | :35:51. | :35:59. | |
committee. I know that many members share this view. To felt act on any | :36:00. | :36:05. | |
one of these compromises the other three because if we do not work with | :36:06. | :36:10. | |
our overseas partners and get the technology right we could create | :36:11. | :36:14. | |
more problems in the future. I hope that the ministers will listen to | :36:15. | :36:19. | |
those concerns and recognise the spirit of what they said about | :36:20. | :36:22. | |
holding back the surveillance state but I hope they will be digital | :36:23. | :36:35. | |
natives and not digital refugees. Interesting comments. The Home | :36:36. | :36:42. | |
Secretary and the shadow secretary both quite correctly begun by paying | :36:43. | :36:47. | |
tribute to the prison officer from Northern Ireland who died today | :36:48. | :36:55. | |
after a play attack on March four. -- currently. The European | :36:56. | :37:00. | |
convention on human rights, the right to life, everyone's right to | :37:01. | :37:05. | |
live show be protected by law, I respect the difficulties ministers | :37:06. | :37:09. | |
have had drafting this bill and bringing together the conflicts of | :37:10. | :37:14. | |
liberty and security and I understand there are calls to | :37:15. | :37:17. | |
improve scrutiny associated with greater powers. However we must take | :37:18. | :37:23. | |
care to avoid damaging the effectiveness of operational | :37:24. | :37:25. | |
decision making that protects our citizens. Effective operations | :37:26. | :37:30. | |
require agility in the face of ruthless opponents. After a decision | :37:31. | :37:36. | |
has been made I am in favour of a more rigorous and rapid review | :37:37. | :37:42. | |
process. I regarded signing warrants as a key responsibility when I took | :37:43. | :37:47. | |
over as Secretary of State for Northern Ireland. Sadly there were | :37:48. | :37:52. | |
elements that would not accept the settlement and were determined to | :37:53. | :37:57. | |
pursue their aims by terrorism. We are equipped agencies at | :37:58. | :38:00. | |
considerable public expense and I was aware are security services | :38:01. | :38:06. | |
could only operate if decisions were made from the top facing a | :38:07. | :38:11. | |
deterioration in the security situation. I was always to be | :38:12. | :38:16. | |
disturbed at any time if an urgent decision was required. The vast | :38:17. | :38:21. | |
majority of warrants were signed in regular slots built into my diary. I | :38:22. | :38:26. | |
was occasionally walk up and asked to make a decision. The proposal to | :38:27. | :38:33. | |
have a dual Lock involving endorsement by a commissioner will | :38:34. | :38:37. | |
bring an element of delay to effective operational decisions. Our | :38:38. | :38:42. | |
calls for more scrutiny of these vital decisions I understand but | :38:43. | :38:50. | |
only a democratically elected Secretary of State should make such | :38:51. | :38:55. | |
decisions. During my time I had real respect... Would he agree that the | :38:56. | :39:04. | |
definition of urgent needs to be one for the minister and not for the | :39:05. | :39:08. | |
judge and therefore they should be no possibility for latent | :39:09. | :39:11. | |
application of judicial review reviewing what is or what is not | :39:12. | :39:17. | |
urgent? Yes, I endorse the whole decision should be in the hands of | :39:18. | :39:21. | |
the democratically elected member of state responsible here and by all | :39:22. | :39:25. | |
means have the most rigorous review after words by a learned judge. I am | :39:26. | :39:32. | |
listening and I did similar things as a minister. Isn't it the case | :39:33. | :39:41. | |
that politicians' minds will always turn to what will happen if I do not | :39:42. | :39:49. | |
sign this? Isn't that judicial check a helpful double lock on that so | :39:50. | :39:53. | |
that the politician does not feel worried that sell your to agree | :39:54. | :39:57. | |
might lead to public embarrassment in the future? No. | :39:58. | :40:07. | |
The politician's responsibility is to report to this House and the | :40:08. | :40:12. | |
politician should be responsible for these very difficult decisions. | :40:13. | :40:15. |