Retention of Communications Data (Further Extension of Initial Period)Order 2005

My Lords, I, too, am grateful for what the Minister said. This is an important order, and the Anti-terrorism Crime and Security Act 2001 under which it is made is landmark legislation in terms of the relationship between the state and the citizen. It is right that we in this place expend much time and anguished debate on every measure that potentially impinges on the liberty or privacy of the subject, as this measure certainly does. I am sure that noble Lords—all four of us—will remember the very strong debate that preceded the passing of the 2001 Act. Noble Lords will remember too—the Government will at any rate—that the sunset clause in Section 204 was forced on the Government in a Division and eventually accepted by the other place. It is perhaps proper to recollect that a major voice in that procedure was that of Lord Alexander, now sadly is no longer with us. I mention him because he had a big part to play in that process. The Minister and I were heavily involved in the passage of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act—another landmark piece of legislation which seeks to protect the state and citizen against terrorism and undue criminal activity. I thank the Minister for a full explanation. The Explanatory Memorandum that accompanied the order was a model of its kind; it set out fully the context in which this order is being made and was helpful to those on these Benches; I am sure that I speak for the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, as well. I am content—just as she was—to concur in the passage of this order, mainly because the Government have been true to their word. I remember well at the time of the passage of the Act that they said they would make every effort to seek a voluntary arrangement with the industry. That they have done, for which I am extremely grateful, because I believe that voluntary arrangements are invariably better than those that are compulsorily placed upon anyone or any body of organisations. I hope that despite the fact that, as the Minister said, some of the companies involved would feel easier if they were forced to do what they are currently doing voluntarily, the Government will encourage the continuation of the voluntary arrangement so long as they are effective. The indications that the Minister gave this afternoon were that they are at the moment effective. How far are the Government having to utilise the provisions of Section 106, which allows the Secretary of State to make appropriate arrangements to pay communications providers who are voluntarily co-operating in the retention of communications data? It would be valuable to know that. I would also be grateful if the Minister could tell the House whether a communications provider who is voluntarily retaining data that it would normally have destroyed, is thereby exposing itself to the risk of civil suit on the part of any individual or entity whose data are being retained as a result of the voluntary arrangements. Because again, if—as I hope and think—the communications provider concerned is not exposing itself to liability to be sued effectively by an individual company concerned, that is another reason why one should persevere if at all possible with the current voluntary arrangements. Subject to hearing what the Minister might have to say on those two questions I am, on behalf of the Liberal Democrat Benches, content to support the passage of the order.