Report of the Independent Surveillance Review
95
Intelligence in the Ministry of Defence and the Office for Security and Counter-Terrorism
(OSCT) in the Home Office. Committee members are subject to Section 1(1)(b) of the
Official Secrets Act 1989 and have access to highly classified material in carrying out
their duties. The Committee takes evidence from Cabinet ministers and senior officials –
all of which is used to formulate its reports.65
4.99
Members of the ISC are appointed by Parliament from across both the Commons and
Lords after nomination by the prime minister, and the Committee reports directly to
Parliament. It is therefore a statutory committee, rather than a parliamentary select
committee (members of which are nominated and elected by Parliament). Parliament was
given a more substantial role in ISC appointments under the Justice and Security Act 2013.
4.100 The ISC does not investigate individual complaints about the security and intelligence
agencies, or allegations that their intrusive powers have been used unlawfully. Such
matters are referred to the IPT. However, shortly after the Snowden disclosures
began in June 2013, the ISC released a statement on GCHQ’s alleged interception of
communications under the US PRISM programme,66 followed by a complete special
report in 2015, ‘Privacy and Security: A Modern and Transparent Legal Framework’.
4.101 The Committee has been criticised in the past for being chaired by individuals having
previously had a close relationship with the agencies: Sir Malcolm Rifkind (former foreign
secretary); Lord King (former defence secretary); and Paul Murphy (former secretary of
state for Northern Ireland). Dr Kim Howells (former minister of state for foreign and
commonwealth affairs) and Baroness Taylor (former minister for international defence
and security) are the only former chairpersons not to have had any involvement with the
agencies prior to their appointment to the ISC, yet Baroness Taylor was also criticised at
the time of her appointment for lacking necessary experience and qualifications.67
4.102 The Committee has also been criticised for not providing rigorous enough oversight of
the SIAs, and for having a cosy rather than arm’s-length relationship with the agencies it
oversees. According to testimony from some of the commissioners, there is evidence to
indicate a lack of constructive and substantive relationship between the commissioners
and the ISC, with the ISC showing a lack of interest in exchanging views.68 The ISR Panel
recommend that there is substantially improved engagement between the commissioners
and ISC to ensure as thorough an oversight process as possible.
65. ISC, ‘About the Committee’, <http://isc.independent.gov.uk/home>.
66. ISC, ‘Statement on GCHQ’s Alleged Interception of Communications under the US PRISM
Programme’, 2013.
67. Matthew Tempest, ‘Lib Dems Criticise Taylor Appointment’, Guardian, 2 August 2011.
68. ISR round-table with the commissioners, February 2015.