Data Retention isn't enough

[Richard Clayton]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


Yesterday the Commons "Fourth Delegated Legislation Committee" debated
the Regulations that transpose the Data Retention Directive (the Lords
will debate them next week):

<URL:http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmgeneral/deleg4/
090316/90316s01.htm>

The main interest must be that the Minister made it pretty clear that
they didn't go far enough, and that the Interception Modernisation
Programme was needed to fill in the gaps:

   Tom Brake (Carshalton and Wallington) (LD): I was hoping that in the
       interests of clarity the Minister could explain whether
       applications such as Facebook or instant messaging are covered by
       the directive.
   Mr. Coaker: No. Social networking sites, such as MySpace or bebo,
       are not covered by the directive. That is one reason why the
       Government are looking at what we should do about the intercept
       modernisation programme because there are certain aspects of
       communications which are not covered by the directive.

[...]

   Mr. Coaker: The hon. Member for Carshalton and Wallington will also
       know the controversy that currently surrounds the intercept
       modernisation programme. I look forward to his support when we
       present intercept modernisation programme proposals, which may
       include requiring the retention of data on Facebook, bebo,
       MySpace and all other similar sites.

Also of interest when Coaker continued -- sounds as if CEOP has finally
come across "tangler" style systems

       Let me use another example, which I saw at the Child Exploitation
       and Online Protection Centre. Paedophiles, who we are some of the
       most heinous people imaginable, are now using games to send their
       horrible material to each other. They do not send it in one game,
       but in several different games. Then, with awful, evil genius,
       the paedophile puts all the individual games together, and bit by
       bit draws off the appalling material from each one and puts that
       together.

Then James Brokenshire (Con) discussed access to the data under RIPA
(which is as we all know very wide-ranging, and the usual examples about
paper-boys and dog fouling were mentioned) and said:

       We believe that the powers under RIPA should be used only to
       combat serious crime and for the protection of national security.
       If this Government are not prepared to act, then a Conservative
       Government will be. We cannot support a statutory instrument
       introducing new powers tied to an existing piece of legislation
       with such abusively wide scope. If the Government should get
       their wish, I say to the Minister that, if my party is elected,
       we will legislate to put in place the necessary protections and
       to undo anything that the Government have put in place that
       conflicts with those protections.

which looks exactly like a promise to me!

Mr Coaker then tried to put Tom Brake (Liberal) on the spot on this and
he said:

   Tom Brake: Without having consulted colleagues, my guess is that it
       would be entirely consistent with the strength of our position on
       RIPA to seek to repeal the regulations and propose something with
       much tougher safeguards than those currently in place. I hope
       that that is helpful to the Minister, and I welcome the trust and
       confidence that he has in our capacity to romp home in the next
       general election. But, as I was saying, unless the Minister can
       produce some real safeguards in his response, I am afraid that I
       will not support the statutory instrument today.

The full debate is worth reading.

- -- 
richard                                              Richard Clayton

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.         Benjamin Franklin

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQA/AwUBSb+NcZoAxkTY1oPiEQJbawCfSoEp148jjzqVfCGOxyWSg3Okxo8AoJeT
q3rpS1vre2dyrWKFHKjK3WCo
=LdFq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----