Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Communications Data) (Additional Functions and Amendment) Order 2006

rose to move, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Communications Data) (Additional Functions and Amendment) Order 2006 [29th Report from the Joint Committee and 37th Report from the Merits Committee]. The noble Baroness said: This order and the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Directed Surveillance and Covert Human Intelligence Sources) (Amendment) Order 2006 will be considered in sequence, but if the Committee approves it may be convenient if I explore both instruments while I am on my feet. These orders were laid before Parliament on 5 June 2006 and made under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. The access to communications data order has been made under Sections 25(1) to (3) and Section 78(5) of the 2000 Act. The aim of the orders is to bring these public authorities within the Act’s strict control and oversight regime. This means that all requirements for acquisition of data, directed surveillance and covert human intelligence sources will have to be, first, for a specific purpose, one drawn directly from the European Convention on Human Rights; secondly, necessary for one of those purposes; thirdly, proportionate to what is sought to be achieved by obtaining the data; and lastly, authorised by an officer at a specific and senior level within the public authority. The order provides powers for new public authorities consistent with powers and functions they already have, such as the Gambling Commission and the Prison Service, or will have—I give as an example the Gangmasters Licensing Authority. It also ensures that long-established authorities with functions of a public nature, such as the Royal Mail, can undertake their functions in a way that is consistent with the regulatory framework. The order has the effect of specifying two new purposes. The current scope of purposes available under RIPA does not adequately reflect current requirements. These purposes have been extended to assist public authorities whose primary function it is to investigate alleged miscarriages of justice, those being the Criminal Cases Review Commission and the Scottish Criminal Cases Review Commission. This order also has the effect of specifying a new purpose to assist the police to identify a deceased person, to investigate the reasons for that person’s death and to trace any next of kin or similar responsible person where no crime is suspected. It would be right to say that when we were contemplating the Act, we did not have the tsunami or 7/7 in mind. Real practical issues have arisen subsequently where our authorities would be greatly assisted, particularly in helping victims’ relatives to identify their loved ones. Communications data such as telephone and internet subscriber information, itemised billing records and even mobile phone location data are vital tools in the prevention and detection of crime, and in some cases can save lives. Communications data do not include the content of any communication, and that is already very tightly regulated by chapter I of Part I of RIPA. The exercise of these powers will be subject to oversight by the Interception of Communications Commissioner, Sir Paul Kennedy. He is obliged to keep under review the exercise and performance of powers and duties relating to acquisition of communications data under chapter II of Part I of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act. Anyone who thinks that their data have been wrongly acquired will have the right to go to the Investigatory Powers Tribunal. All the public authorities listed in this order must follow the procedures set down in the draft code of practice on acquisition and disclosure of communications data explaining the application of the statutory provisions in detail. This has been extensively revised and, as the Committee will know, is currently subject to public consultation. Accreditation of trained officials and authorising officers will ensure that those with legitimate and necessary access to such information know the legal and technical issues. The Government believe that there are sanctions in place now to deal with abuse of the chapter II powers. Equally, as a society we are all increasingly aware of the value which data about us have and what they can reveal about our lives. That is true of all personal data, not just communications data. The directed surveillance and covert human intelligence sources order is made in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 30(1), (3), (5) and (6) and Section 78(5) of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Part II of the Act and the covert human intelligence sources order provide a statutory framework regulating the conduct of covert surveillance and the use of covert human intelligence sources by public authorities consistent with the Human Rights Act 1998. In Part II the duties and responsibilities placed on each party involved in the process are explained and a system of safeguards, reflecting the requirements of Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights, is included. The order provides powers for new public authorities, consistent with powers and functions they already have, in the case of the Healthcare Commission, or will have, in the case of the Gangmasters Licensing Authority, to undertake their functions in a way that is consistent with the regulatory framework. The Committee will be familiar with the difficulties that we had in relation to gangmasters and the need to properly regulate them. It also provides for the withdrawal of powers from public authorities or from public officials that no longer have such requirements. Conduct of directed surveillance does not include covert surveillance of anything taking place on any residential premises or in any private vehicle. That would constitute intrusive surveillance. This order does not confer any powers on any public authority to conduct intrusive surveillance. Each of the entries being inserted into part 1 of the schedule to the 2003 order prescribes the persons entitled to grant authorisations under Sections 28 and 29 of RIPA. Those grounds are described by letters which refer to the paragraphs in Sections 28(3) and 29(3) of RIPA. Codes of practice on covert surveillance and covert human intelligence sources, which have been approved by Parliament by affirmative resolution, set out the procedures, and the Chief Surveillance Commissioner provides independent oversight. The draft orders represent a significant move to ensure that public authorities carry out their activities in a strictly regulated manner protecting an individual’s right to privacy. In our view, the orders are compatible with the rights set out in the European Convention on Human Rights, and implement a proper regime whereby this conduct can take place in a way which explicitly respects those rights. The Committee will remember that we promised that we would come back to the first order, so we are complying with our promise. I hope that the Committee will welcome both orders as being sensible and appropriate extensions to help us to better meet the needs of the people whom we are trying to protect. I beg to move. Moved, That the Grand Committee do report to the House that it has considered the Regulation of Investigatory Powers (Communications Data) (Additional Functions and Amendment) Order 2006 [29th Report from the Joint Committee and 37th Report from the Merits Committee].—(Baroness Scotland of Asthal.)