In a letter to Theresa May, Dominic Raab MP sets out Tory backbenchers’ concerns about the Communications Data Bill

By Peter Hoskin
_{Follow Peter on Twitter}

We already knew that the Government is redrafting the Communications Data Bill after opposition to the current plans from Tory MPs and many others. But now, this morning, we have a clearer sense of the depth of feeling on the Tory backbenches. Dominic Raab has written a letter to Theresa May, signed by 40 of his party colleagues, to highlight his and their concerns about the policy as it stands.

I have reproduced the entire text of the letter at the bottom of this post, although here are its four main points of order:

1. “We urge you to limit the application of the Bill to terrorist offences and the most serious crimes, limit access to such data to the intelligence agencies, SOCA and the police, and make the regime subject to judicial warrant as a safeguard against abuse.”
2. “From a law enforcement perspective, there has been no explanation as to how those using foreign internet and communications service providers will be prevented from circumventing the regime.”
3. “Equally, given the public sector's woeful track record of protecting personal data, we are concerned about the vulnerability of the scheme to both the negligence of officials and attempts to infiltrate the system by those with criminal intent. We would urge you to consult in further detail with the Information Commissioner, internet providers, telephone companies and other external experts, to test the technical integrity of the proposals.”
4. “Finally, the Home Office estimates the proposals would cost £2 billion. The Committee stated that these estimates ‘are not robust’. We urge Ministers to subject the proposals to external audit and re-consider their law enforcement cost-benefit in light of the suggestions made, above, to limit their breadth and tighten their focus.”

The stand-out line, though, comes at the very end: “In the absence of reassurance on these points, we would find it difficult to support the proposals.” So who are “we”? The full list of signatories is not being made public, although Mr Raab is saying that around half of them are from the 2010 intake. Strikingly, the 40 Tory MPs outnumber the entire cohort of 38 Lib Dem backbenchers, who might also be expected to rebel on this matter.  

“Dear Home Secretary,

The Joint Parliamentary Committee considering the Draft Communications Bill reported last week, highlighting a range of serious issues with the current proposals. We share many of them.

We support your efforts to strengthen law enforcement, but believe it is crucial to ensure such measures focus on the fight against terrorism and the most serious crime. The current proposals would expand the wide net of existing surveillance powers to cover every telephone call, email, web access and text message from every law-abiding citizen, to be processed by what the Committee described as a ‘federated database’. There has been no proper explanation of how clauses 14 to 16, concerning ‘filtering arrangements’, will work in practice. It is clear that they would authorise datamining, deep packet inspection and other techniques designed to infer potentially suspicious activity from the patterns of mass data held on every innocent citizen in this country.

The Information Commissioner has warned that these plans would herald ‘a step change in the relationship between the citizen and the state’. We urge you to limit the application of the Bill to terrorist offences and the most serious crimes, limit access to such data to the intelligence agencies, SOCA and the police, and make the regime subject to judicial warrant as a safeguard against abuse.

From a law enforcement perspective, there has been no explanation as to how those using foreign internet and communications service providers will be prevented from circumventing the regime. Equally, given the public sector's woeful track record of protecting personal data, we are concerned about the vulnerability of the scheme to both the negligence of officials and attempts to infiltrate the system by those with criminal intent. We would urge you to consult in further detail with the Information Commissioner, internet providers, telephone companies and other external experts, to test the technical integrity of the proposals.

Finally, the Home Office estimates the proposals would cost £2 billion. The Committee stated that these estimates ‘are not robust’. We urge Ministers to subject the proposals to external audit and re-consider their law enforcement cost-benefit in light of the suggestions made, above, to limit their breadth and tighten their focus.

In the absence of reassurance on these points, we would find it difficult to support the proposals.

Yours sincerely,

Dominic Raab”