Powers of councils to obtain communications data to go under draft Bill
Local authorities and hundreds of other public bodies that have access to communications data will no longer be able to obtain that information “unless Parliament agrees their use is vital to tackling crime and protecting the public”, the Home Office has said.
However, the Communications Data Bill, which will give greater powers to other organisations such as the police, was slammed by critics as a “snooper’s charter”.
Campaign group Big Brother Watch described the announcement on local authorities as a “pathetic compromise” that would not fool the public about the intrusive nature of the Government’s main proposals.
Under the Bill, communications data will be taken out of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) and covered by a new regulatory framework.
Communications data is information generated about a communication such as the time and duration of a communication (for example, a visit to a website), the number or email address of the originator and recipient and sometimes the location of the device. It does not mean the actual content of the communication.
The Communications Data Bill will replace a number of currently available powers with a single piece of legislation. The acquisition of data will continue to be overseen by the Interception of Communications Commissioner.
It will require Communications Service Providers, when requested to do so, to retain and store communications records which they may not retain at present for their own business records. Providers will be reimbursed with the cost of complying.
“This legislation will ensure that, as communications technology changes, the police will maintain access to this data in future,” the Home Office said. “But access to data will continue to be permitted only in the context of a specific investigation or operation.”
Four bodies will have enhanced powers thanks to the the new rules:
- The police;
- The Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA)/National Crime Agency (NCA);
- The intelligence agencies; and
- Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs.
The Home Office emphasised that it would not be giving extra powers to local authorities, which account for less than 0.5% of total annual RIPA requests for communications data.
“In fact we are restricting local authority access to sensitive data through the Protection of Freedoms Act, which means that authorities will have to apply to magistrates for the first time to obtain certain types of data – a change which is new under this government,” it said.
The Home Office also claimed that without action by government, crimes enabled by email and the internet would increasingly go undetected and unpunished.
Theresa May said: “Communications data saves lives. It is a vital tool for the police to catch criminals and to protect children. If we stand by as technology changes we will leave police officers fighting crime with one hand tied behind their backs.
“Checking communication records, not content, is a crucial part of day-to-day policing and the fingerprinting of the modern age – we are determined to ensure its continued availability in cracking down on crime.”
The Home Office denied that the Bill would enable unfettered access by the police to data about people's communications. It also said it would not lead to the creation of a single government database containing people’s emails and phone calls to which the police and agencies could get unlimited and unregulated access.
Obligations will not be placed on every provider and only then after “detailed discussion and ministerial sign-off”. The Home Office added that CSPs would be able to appeal to a technical advisory board under dispute procedures if they felt requests made of them were unnecessarily onerous.
All data retained by CSPs will be destroyed at the end of a retention period lasting 12 months, unless it is to be used for legal proceedings.
Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) crime head Jon Murphy chief constable of Merseyside Police said: “Communications data is vital to law enforcement. It is an essential and irreplaceable tool for protecting the public, keeping people safe from harm and, ultimately, saving lives.
“It provides investigative breakthroughs to the most serious of crimes, including child abuse, murder, rape, kidnapping, cyber crime and terrorism offences.”
The draft Bill will be subject to scrutiny by a joint committee of both houses of Parliament.
But Nick Pickles, director of campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: “This policy goes against the Coalition Agreement, against Conservative pre-election policy and is fundamentally an illiberal, intrusive scheme that will do little to improve national security and do everything to turn us into a nation of suspects.
“A pathetic compromise on council snooping is not going to fool the public, so the Home Office are resorting to the same scaremongering the last Government used to justify ID Cards, 90 day detention without charge and countless other authoritarian policies. ”
Pickles added: “Before the election, the Prime Minister said that ‘If we want to stop the state controlling us, we must confront this surveillance state’. He was absolutely right.”
A spokesperson for the Information Commissioner’s Office said: “Ultimately, it is for Parliament to determine whether or not the proposals contained in the draft Bill are a proportionate response to the perceived problem of communications data capability.
“The Information Commissioner will contribute to the Joint Committee's consideration of the draft Bill and, in particular, the adequacy of the proposed safeguards and limitations.
“If the Information Commissioner is to be in a position to ensure compliance with the Data Protection Act, in respect of security of retained personal information and its destruction after 12 months, the ICO will need appropriately enhanced powers and the necessary additional resources.”