By Nick Heath, 13 August 2008 14:36
NEWS
Powers to snoop on the UK's email and internet records will be of limited use in tackling serious crime, the government has admitted.
Home Office proposals for phone, email and internet records - including VoIP - to be kept for 12 months are expected to cost taxpayers up to £68m to set up and £39m per year to run.
Broadband from A to Z
Click on the links below to find out more...
A is for ADSL
B is for BT
C is for Cable & Wireless
D is for Dial-up
E is for Education
F is for Fibre
G is for Goonhilly
H is for HSDPA
I is for In-flight
J is for Janet
K is for Kingston
L is for Landlines
M is for Murdoch
N is for Next generation
O is for Ofcom
P is for Power lines
Q is for Quad-play
R is for Remote working
S is for Satellite phones
T is for Trains
U is for Unbundling
V is for VoIP
W is for WiMax
X is for Xbox
Y is for YouTube
Z is for Zombies
Consultation papers released this week show the government wants to keep the "who", "when" and "where" of communication to "assist in the investigation, detection and prosecution of serious crime".
But a spokeswoman for the Home Office admitted the proposals would be of restricted use against organised criminals or terrorist organisations, as they were likely to disguise their communications.
Hiding internet or email traffic is relatively simple using methods such as logging on using unregistered 3G dongles, using third party wi-fi networks and by sending email using a secure tunnel and proxy.
The spokeswoman suggested the information may be of more use against ordinary citizens and minor criminals.
She said: "The serious criminals may be far more savvy than your normal Joe Blow and the information we collect [for them] is not going to be of the same calibre."
But she said the measures would be worth it if they were to provide evidence that helped convict even one person suspected of a "serious crime".
The legislation would mean that hundreds of public bodies licensed under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act - including local councils, health authorities and government agencies - will have access to the communication information.
As of last September telecoms providers must keep all text and phone call records between six months and two years under an EU directive, and this is to be rolled out to include all online traffic by 2009 at the latest. This legislation would bring the UK in line with this requirement.
The Internet Services Providers Association said it welcomed proposals to reimburse ISPs for the cost of retaining data but was reserving comment ahead of its response to the consultation on the legislation, due to end in October.
Information Commissioner Richard Thomas recently spoke out against plans to retain communications records in a centralised database.
Comments
There are 7 comments. Join the discussion
1. Andrew Beaumont
If this isn't stopped then it would certainly be a 'snoopers charter'. I for one will not participate in assisting the government.
The phrase that is the hymn of tyrannies everywhere is "If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear".
However, what I fear most of all is government intrusion, perhaps the old saying should be rephrased as "If you have something to fear, you have nowhere to hide".
It should always be remembered that social services and other government and local authorities are able to view this sort of information and when everyone is under suspision, then all e-mails that they read are suspicious, regardless of the actual innocence of intention.
Be Afraid, be very afraid.
2. Karen Challinor
"Powers to snoop on the UK's email and internet records will be of limited use in tackling serious crime, the government has admitted."
- so are they going to stop doing it ? .. no
"But a spokeswoman for the Home Office admitted the proposals would be of restricted use against organised criminals or terrorist organisations, as they were likely to disguise their communications."
- I believe I've said all along that measures like this would be useless against the real terrorists and criminals, all it seems to do is allow council officials to snoop on their neighbours
"But she said the measures would be worth it if they were to provide evidence that helped convict even one person suspected of a "serious crime"."
- and if that day comes the government will trumpet it from every rooftop, while at the same time failing to mention the millions of people who have had their privacy infringed or had unfounded suspicions against them investigated
"The Internet Services Providers Association said it welcomed proposals to reimburse ISPs for the cost of retaining data but was reserving comment ahead of its response to the consultation on the legislation, due to end in October."
- so the measures might get paid for out of taxes instead of by ISP's putting their prices up, you and I still pay in the end, but with taxes you can't avoid paying by not using the internet
the gist of the article seems to be that the home office aren't so sure it's a good idea but they are going to do it anyway, just in case
3. Radical Meldrew
The control freaks hit us again and again, sad times for this country and even sadder times for the concept of democracy.
4. anonymous
All telephone calls and emails made by MPs should be recorded and stored for at least 3 years. The records should be made available to the public so that we can hear and read exactly what our ellected MPs are up to.
But why not? Surely they have nothing to hide and therefore nothing to fear !
5. Richard Percival
I find it fascinating that a government spokesperson states that this cost of GBP 68M would be worth it if it helped uncover a single serious crime.
By whose authority should such disproportionate measures be taken? Have they all taken leave of their senses?
Their have to be ways to invest taxpayers' money that will ensure a better, and measurable, rate of return.
6. Charles Smith
Don't moan about it here! Write to your MP and complain in the strongest possible terms.
These lucifigous officials only survive because we let them get away with reducing our liberty.
7. I
"But she said the measures would be worth it if they were to provide evidence that helped convict even one person suspected of a "serious crime"."
Like overfilling their bin or putting it out for collection outside of the hours permitted by the wouldbe 4th Reich Council Obersturmenfurhers?