Theresa May sets out plans to monitor internet use in the UK


Home Secretary Theresa May: "On occasions this is quite simply a matter of life and death"

Related Stories

Details of internet use in the UK will have to be stored for a year to allow police and intelligence services to access it, under government plans.

Records will include people's activity on social network sites, webmail, internet phone calls and online gaming.

Home Secretary Theresa May said the change was needed to keep up with how criminals were using new technology.

But senior Tory David Davis said it was "incredibly intrusive" and would only "catch the innocent and incompetent".

The Communications Data Bill has been published in draft form - but the government faces a battle to get it through Parliament intact, with Lib Dem MPs and Conservatives such as Mr Davis calling for it to be watered down or abandoned altogether.

Restrictions are likely to be placed on the types of phone and internet data local councils can access in an effort to win over critics, but the proposals have still been branded a "snooper's charter" by civil liberties campaigners.

Rachel Robinson, policy officer for Liberty, said: "It's good that local councils won't be able to watch the entire population but even law enforcement should be targeting suspects - not all citizens.

"Just like the internet, any private home can be a crime scene, but should we install hidden cameras and microphones in every bedroom in the land?"

'Stopping terrorists'

Under current legislation, communications companies must keep phone records and information about messages sent via their own email services for 12 months.

Key points

  • The Bill extends the range of data telecoms firms will have to store for up to 12 months
  • It will include for the first time details of messages sent on social media, webmail, voice calls over the internet and gaming in addition to emails and phone calls
  • The data includes the time, duration, originator and recipient of a communication and the location of the device from which it is made
  • It does not include the content of messages - what is being said. Officers will need a warrant to see that
  • But they will not need the permission of a judge to see details of the time and place of messages provided they are investigating a crime or protecting national security
  • Four bodies will have access to data: Police, the Serious and Organised Crime Agency, the intelligence agencies and HM Revenue and Customs
  • Local authorities will face restrictions on the kinds of data they will be able to access

The new proposals would require UK communications companies to keep details of a much wider range of data, also including websites visited, although pages within sites would not be.

Mrs May told BBC Breakfast: "It's not about the content, it's not about reading people's emails or listening to their telephone calls.

"This is purely about the who, when and where made these communications and it's about ensuring we catch criminals and stop terrorists."

The police and security services are concerned that criminals and terrorists are increasingly evading detection by using social media and online gaming sites to communicate with each other. HM Revenue and Customs will also be able to access data under the proposed new rules.

Officers would still need to obtain a warrant to gain access to the content of the online communication.

But the government would be able to request any service provider to keep data about internet usage, although initially it will involve about a dozen firms including BT, Virgin and Sky.

Peter Davies, head of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre, said his unit received 1,500 referrals a month from people concerned that children were being abused but investigators were being "stymied" by not being able to access the communications data they needed to see.

The Home Office estimates its plans for wider collection of data will cost £1.8bn over the next 10 years - but claims it will save up to £6.2bn over the same period through more efficient investigations and greater criminal asset seizures.

'Total war'

The previous, Labour, government was forced to abandon plans to store every citizen's internet data on a single, giant database following protests - and Mrs May says she has no plan to resurrect this idea.

Start Quote

In the first instance, it is understood this could involve more than a dozen of the UK's biggest communications companies including BT, Virgin and Sky”

End Quote

The proposals will be subject to scrutiny by a joint parliamentary committee before the effort to bring the measures through Parliament and into law begins in earnest.

Metropolitan Police Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe, writing in the Times, said having greater powers to access data was essential in waging a "total war on crime" - and he warned that police risked losing the fight against crime unless MPs passed a law enabling them to collect more communications data.

The Met police chief wrote: "Put simply, the police need access to this information to keep up with the criminals who bring so much harm to victims and our society."

Tory backbencher David Davis, a former shadow home secretary who fought a by-election in the last Parliament on the issue of civil liberties, described the proposals as "incredibly intrusive".

He said the ban on local authority officials accessing data was "important but minor".

He told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "If they really want to do things like this - and we all accept they use data to catch criminals - get a warrant. Get a judge to sign a warrant, not the guy at the next desk, not somebody else in the same organisation.

"The only people who will avoid this are the actual criminals, because there are ways around this - you use an internet cafe, you hack into somebody's wi-fi, you use what's called proxy servers, and they are just the easy ways."


More on This Story

Related Stories


This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
  • rate this

    Comment number 847.

    We know, now, that the internet has been abused by cyber-bullies, child pornographers, terrorists and the like.
    We wouldn't let arms traders off if a gun fell into the wrong hands. Not even if those involved argued it was their business what they bought and sold or who they shot.
    So why are internet service providers and users who cause harm to others any different?

  • rate this

    Comment number 832.

    The determined will get around it, as most will do already -very easy to be anonymous on the internet if you know what you are doing.

    Instead of arresting, and sometimes extraditing, UK citizens who demostrate skills infiltrating networks and hacking, maybe it would be better to employ them to inflitrate and detect online criminality.

    Police work will never be replaced by a "google" or DB search

  • rate this

    Comment number 338.

    Privacy is something you only have until it's given away. That's exactly what this bill does, gives your privacy away to the government. Just wait a couple of governments down the line and this data will be sold and leaked to whoever pays enough money. The last time I checked the police were more than capable of capturing internet criminals without this £2 billion system.

  • rate this

    Comment number 322.

    Almost every high street has CCTV. The internet is just an electronic high street and should be seen and treated as such.

  • rate this

    Comment number 138.

    Welcome to the Orwellian world.


Comments 5 of 9


More Politics stories



Copyright © 2015 BBC. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.