be able to inform our interrogation and scrutiny”.
47
To that end, the Review team
sought out and obtained useful input from Dr. Richard Clayton of the University
of Cambridge and Dr. Paul Bernal of the University of East Anglia, who in
addition to his academic responsibilities is a member of the recently-established
Independent Digital Ethics Panel for Policing [IDEPP].
1.53.
I also used my website and social media to invite contact from anyone with
specialist expertise or experience that could usefully assist the Review.
In
response, the Review had approaches from a number of people who had worked
in a classified environment (including, in some cases, for an SIA) but who had
subsequently moved out of that world. These people were of particular interest
to the Review, because they combined an understanding of how the powers or
similar powers had been used with an insight into how they are perceived by
CSPs, internet service providers and others. Most (though not all) believed the
powers under review to have at least some utility, but each brought insights of a
technical and/or legal nature and, in some cases, suggestions for improvement.
I am grateful in this respect for productive dialogues with John Davies, David
Wells, Matt Tait, Gail Kent and Neil Brown (also a member of IDEPP) and with
others who wished to remain anonymous, and for correspondence from the
former NSA technical director, William Binney. The Review also received a short
submission on behalf of five US tech companies, Facebook, Google, Microsoft,
Twitter and Yahoo, which reiterated their view that “governments should limit
surveillance to specific, known users for lawful purposes, and should not
undertake bulk collection of internet communications”.
1.54.
The Review team had the opportunity to put to the SIAs for their comment many
of the points made by the above persons, and to evaluate their written and oral
responses.
Views of others
1.55.
It goes without saying that none of those who made submissions or with whom
the Review team had contact should be assumed to subscribe to the views
expressed in this Report. In common with any factual errors, any views
expressed are my responsibility alone. But having seen a final draft of this
Report, each member of the Review team has asked me to say that they are fully
in agreement with my conclusions and recommendation.
Completion of the Review
1.56.
47
As is my usual practice, I have expressed my conclusions in a single open
document from which no passages have been redacted. This means that it has
https://terrorismlegislationreviewer.independent.gov.uk/bulk-powers-review/.
18