Proposed 'information hub' already under attack

New proposals to build a new central database of all mobile phone and internet networking data have already met with fierce opposition across party lines. The system, designed to aid crime investigation and the elimination of terrorist activity, has been condemned as “Orwellian” and has caused controversial debate amongst party leaders.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith stated that the police and security services needed to implement new measures in order to keep up with technology. She said, “Our ability to intercept communications and obtain communications data is vital to fighting terrorism and combating serious crime, including child sex abuse, murder and drugs trafficking.”

She continued, “the communications revolution has been rapid in this country and the way in which we intercept communications and collect communications data needs to change.”

While the home secretary maintains that the content of the conversations will not be stored, purely the times, dates and locations of calls and messages, the system was slammed by the Liberal Democrats who maintained it was “incompatible with a free country.” The Conservative party, too, rejected the proposal, calling on the government to justify its plans.

The necessary details of times, dates, duration and location of mobile phone calls, numbers called, websites visited and email correspondence is currently already stored by Telecommunication companies for up to 12 months, and can be accessed by police and security services on request. However, the Government plans to take charge of this process and create a single accessible database in a bid to ease crime investigation and comply with a new EU directive.

Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon spoke in favour of the government's database proposal, maintaining that ignoring mobile phone and internet traffic would be “giving a licence to terrorists to kill people.”

On BBC One's Question Time, Mr Hoon maintained that the storing of communications data is merely extending a system currently implemented in regard to ordinary telephone calls, to that of data and information, “going across the internet.” He continued, arguing that extending the communication records were for, “perfectly proper reasons, to protect our society.”

However, the Liberal Democrats communities spokesperson Julia Goldsworthy rejected this idea, commenting on the “Orwellian” nature of the proposal itself and questioning whether or not the Government could be trusted with such information. “How much more control can they have? How far are they prepared to go to undermine civil liberties?” she asked.

Shadow home secretary Dominic Grieve, for the Conservatives, echoed views of the Lib Dems maintaining that “these proposals would mark a substantial shift in the powers of the state to obtain personal information on individuals.

"The government must present convincing justification for such an exponential increase in the powers of the state”

Jacqui Smith emphasised the necessity of this proposal to BBC News, and why communication interception had to change. “If it does not we will lose this vital capability... the capability that enabled us to convict Ian Huntley for the Soham murders and that enabled us to achieve the convictions of those responsible for the 21/7 terrorist plots against London.”

In response to societal worries regarding the intrusive nature of the database plan, Ms Smith said, “There are no plans for an enormous database which will contain the content of your emails, the texts that you send or the chats you have on the phone or online.”

However, despite this, there are still widespread concerns regarding the mass storage of such data. The government's own reviewer of anti-terror laws, Lord Carlile said: “The raw idea of simply handing over all this information to any government, however benign, and sticking it in an electronic warehouse is an awful idea if there are not very strict controls about it.”

Keith Vaz, the chairman of the home affairs committee repeated these concerns: “Extreme caution needs to be taken when considering the extension of state surveillance powers,” he said.

“There are around 500,000 mistakes on the DNA database. Before the information the state takes is extended, there needs to be a major clean-up and a full scale review of future processes.”