Investigatory Powers Bill: Snoopers’ Charter is unclear and gives spies powers that they don’t need, influential parliamentary inquiry concludes
The committee has been criticised for not being critical enough on the Government, but said that the new bill appeared to have been written in a rush
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.One of parliament’s most senior committees has criticised the Government’s proposed snooping powers, saying that the bill enabling them was rushed and gives spies far too few protections.
The influential Intelligence and Security Committee has said that the landmark Investigatory Powers Bill gives spies far too many powers.
In particular, it drew attention to rules that allow for bulk equipment interference — spies being allowed to hack into phones and other devices on a mass scale, and requiring that companies help them. It said that the bill was unclear about how these warrants might work and tha tit was “not convinced as to the requirement for them”.
The government had hoped to pass the bill early this year, renewing powers that are set to soon expire. But the new report could be a major blow for the government’s hopes to get the bill through parliament quickly and smoothly.
It said the proposals in their current form represent a "missed opportunity" and called for ministers to make a number of substantial changes.
It described the approach in the Bill towards security services' examination of communications data - the who, when and where but not the content of an email or phone call - as "inconsistent and largely incomprehensible".
Tory MP Dominic Grieve, chairman of the committee, said: "The issues under consideration are undoubtedly complex, however it has been evident that even those working on the legislation have not always been clear as to what the provisions are intended to achieve."
Mr Grieve added: "The draft Bill appears to have suffered from a lack of sufficient time and preparation."
Additional reporting by Press Association
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments