2011 Annual Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner
Figure 11 – Comparison of Council Inspection Results, 2010 vs. 2011
82%
Good
69%
14%
Satisfactory
Poor
20%
2011
2010
4%
11%
The vast majority of the local authorities that were inspected during the reporting year were
completing their applications to a good or satisfactory standard. Even though my inspectors were
satisfied that the requests were necessary and proportionate, they concluded that there is still
room for a number of the applicants to improve on the quality of their application forms and
suitable advice was provided.
My inspectors found that the DPs were generally discharging their statutory duties responsibly
and the vast majority were found to be completing their written considerations to a good
standard. However, my inspectors were concerned to find that in five of the local authorities
inspected the DPs had not actually recorded any written considerations when approving some
of the applications and this constitutes non-compliance with Paragraph 3.7 of the Code of
Practice. In these cases the DPs had mistakenly believed that they did not need to record any
considerations. These local authorities have now amended their systems to ensure that they
comply in this respect in future. It is important for DPs to comply with this aspect of the Code
of Practice to provide evidence that each application has been duly considered.
“In five of the local authorities inspected the DPs had not recorded any written
considerations when approving some of the applications and this constitutes
non-compliance with... the Code of Practice...These local authorities have now
amended their systems to ensure that they comply in this respect in future”
A large number of the local authorities were still not aware that it is the statutory duty of the
DP to issue Section 22(4) Notices, despite the fact that I raised this point in last year’s report.
The SPoCs were completing the Notices after the DPs had approved the applications. As a result
procedural (‘recordable’) errors occurred, but importantly these had no bearing on the actual
justifications for acquiring the data.
41