RIP: HC Written Answers, 27 June, 2000 (Jack Straw)

[Yaman Akdeniz]

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill 
House of Commons, Written Answers, 27 June, 2000.

Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department 
what recent representations she has received concerning the Regulation of 
Investigatory Powers Bill; and which organisations have expressed concern about 
the Bill's provisions. [127459] 

Mr. Straw: I have received a number of representations on the Regulation of 
Investigatory Powers Bill including from:  

The Confederation of British Industry/Alliance for Electronic Business;  
Institute of Directors;  
British Chambers of Commerce;  
London Investment Bankers Association;  
British Bankers Association;  
Internetforum;  
Internet Service Providers Association/London Internet Exchange; and  
Vodafone. 

The content of representations was described in the reply I gave the hon. Member 
for Lewes (Mr. Baker) on 20 June 2000, Official Report, columns 147-48W.  

Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill [20 Jun 2000]  
Mr. Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what has 
been the nature of the representations he has received recently from business 
interests in respect of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill. [126305] 

Mr. Straw: I have received various representations from business interests since 
the introduction of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Bill to the House of 
Commons on 9 February this year. They have supported the broad aims of the 
Bill. Most have pressed for changes to minimise the uncertainty over the impact of 
Clause 12 (maintenance of a reasonable intercept capability). The Clause has 
been amended in response to some of these representations. The Alliance for 
Electronic Business pressed for affirmative resolution for the order under Clause 
12. This was provided by amendment at Commons Report. We have also 
amended the Bill to require the Secretary of State to meet the marginal costs of 
interception. Some businesses have also asked for reassurances which have been 
given as to how we intend the regime to work. Others are pressing us about the 
costs of maintaining a reasonable intercept capability on the internet. 20 Jun 2000 
: Column: 148W Business interests have also pressed for some changes to Part 
III of the Bill in relation to access to encryption keys. 

Changes have been made to Part III in response to these representations. For 
example, the Bill has been amended to say that keys can be accessed only "in 
special circumstances" as a direct response to industry representations. 
Amendments designed to clarify what should be contained in a decryption notice 
and to remove the Directors' liability in respect of  Part III of the Bill were also a 
response to industry representations. 


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. Yaman Akdeniz,
Director, Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
URL: http://www.cyber-rights.org
E-mail: lawya@cyber-rights.org
Tel: +44 (0)498 865116

Read the CR&CL (UK) Reports at:
http://www.cyber-rights.org/reports/ 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~