The controversial Data Retention and Investigatory Powers (DRIP) Bill has been approved by the House of Lords after only two days of debate there and one in the House of Commons.
The Bill was voted for by MPs after a single debate and then passed to the Lords, where, although voting for it, Peers criticised the speed of its implementation and questioned the timetable of its passage through Parliament.
Internet entrepreneur and independent crossbench peer Baroness Lane-Fox said that it made her very nervous that Bills that require such technical expertise are given so little time, adding that as someone from a digital background, it was disappointing to see legislation that directly affects the country’s security being given such a cursory debate.
Civil liberties campaigners have also decried the speed and content of the new law, saying that, while they appreciate that such data could be vital in serious criminal investigations, the rules are disproportionate and Parliament should have had more than three days to look at such an important issue.
The new Act requires internet and phone companies including US-based firms, such as Google, to store all personal communications data for 12 months so that it can be accessed by police and security services. However, the Act has an expiry date of December 2016.
Despite the disquiet about how it has been rushed through, the few debates that have been conducted in the eight days it has taken between the Government’s announcement of the Bill and the creation of the Act has demonstrated that there is widespread consensus that the current main surveillance law, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), is a “broken and bleeding sore”, and urgently needs replacing.
Home Secretary Theresa May welcomed the vote and said that the law was essential to UK security and warned that delays in its implementation could cause “innocent lives to be lost”.