Meetings with the Secretaries of State
2.3 During the period of this Report I met the Home Secretary, the Foreign
Secretary, the Secretary of State for Defence, the Secretary of State for Northern
Ireland and the Scottish Government Cabinet Secretary for Justice. It is clear to
me that each of them gives a substantial amount of time and takes considerable
care to satisfy himself or herself that the warrants are necessary for the authorised
purposes, and that what is proposed is proportionate. If the Secretary of State
wishes to have further information in order to be satisfied that he or she should
grant the warrant then it is requested and given. Outright and final refusal of an
application is comparatively rare, because the requesting agencies and the senior
officials in the Secretary of State’s Department scrutinise the applications with
care before they are submitted for approval. However, the Secretary of State may
refuse to grant the warrant if he or she considers, for example, that the strict
requirements of necessity and proportionality are not met. The agencies are well
aware that the Secretary of State does not act as a “rubber stamp”.
Visits to the communication service providers and internet service providers
2.4 During 2009, I visited a total of nine communications service providers
(CSPs) and internet service providers (ISPs) consisting of the Royal Mail and the
communications companies who are most engaged in interception work. These
visits, mostly outside London, are not formal inspections but are designed to
enable me to meet both senior staff in each company as well as the personnel who
carry out the work on the ground, and for them to meet and talk to me. I have no
doubt that the staff in the CSPs and ISPs welcome these visits. We discussed the
work that they do, the safeguards that are in place, any errors that have occurred,
any legal or other issues which are of concern to them, and their relationships
with the intercepting agencies. Those in the CSPs and ISPs who work in this
field are committed and professional. They recognise the importance of the public
interest, and the necessity of doing all their work accurately and efficiently, and
show considerable dedication to it.
Intelligence and Security Committee
2.5 Along with the Intelligence Services Commissioner, Sir Peter Gibson,
I attended the meeting of the Intelligence and Security Committee on 21 April
2009 for an informal discussion about our respective roles. There was a helpful
exchange of views on a number of current issues including the work of the agencies
over the last year and the challenges ahead, changes in number of warrants and
authorisations, trends in the number of interception warrant breaches and errors
and the admissibility of intercept as evidence, about which I will say more later in
this Report.
Privy Council Review of Intercept as Evidence
2.6 In paragraphs 2.6 – 2.7 of my Annual Reports for both 2007 and 2008 I
reported on the Prime Minister’s announcement of a Privy Council Review of
Intercept as Evidence under the chairmanship of Sir John Chilcot. I think it
appropriate for the sake of continuity to re-state the background to this issue again
before reporting on progress.
2.7 In my Reports I commented on the statement made by the Prime Minister
to the House of Commons on 6 February 2008 accepting the committee’s main
conclusion that it should be possible to find a way to use some intercept material
as evidence provided – and only provided – that certain key conditions can be met.
The report sets out nine conditions in detail. They relate to complex and important
issues, and include: giving the intercepting agencies the ability to retain control
over whether their material is used in prosecutions; ensuring that disclosure of
material cannot be required against the wishes of the agency originating the
material; protecting the current close co-operation between intelligence and law
enforcement agencies; and ensuring that agencies cannot be required to transcribe
or make notes of material beyond a standard of detail that they deem necessary.
3