Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2007

My Lords, I am very grateful to both noble Lords for their support for the regulations and for the intelligence of their questions. I am not sure that I can answer all their very important questions this evening. I shall endeavour to respond to them in due course in writing. The noble Lord, Lord Henley, asked for more clarification on the internet aspects of the issue. It is clear from our early engagement with the industry that we need additional time to develop the implementation of the directive on internet-related communications. That consultation indicated the additional complexity associated with it. As I made plain, or certainly alluded to, some thought needs to be given to the technical resourcing issues, which may take time to resolve. We will have to return to that issue. The existence of the voluntary code of practice under the Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 will enable some early work on the retention of communications data to proceed. That will of course inform our understanding of how best to complete the transposition of the directive. That is part of the explanation of why we need to return to that issue. The noble Lord was also concerned about the funding arrangement for data retention. The regulations make provision to continue with the established UK policy of reimbursing public communications providers that incur expenditure from adjusting their business practices to comply with government requirements. I understand that we are budgeting some £6 million annually to meet appropriate data retention and associated data retrieval costs. Our approach to reimbursement is to ensure that communications data retention is cost-neutral to industry. We do not want to benefit one data provider against another so that the market is skewed. We are making appropriate contributions to costs incurred by providers and where they undertake to retain data for extended periods. In practice, these contributions cover 100 per cent of costs. That does not mean that every provider is being funded, because some already retain this data for their own purposes. The noble Lord, Lord Henley, asked why Regulation 10 states that reimbursement ““may”” be made? The use of ““may”” rather than ““shall”” is necessary to ensure that, where there is potentially duplicative storage of communications data, the Secretary of State can take measures to ensure that data is retained in the most efficient manner. There is no intention to avoid reimbursement of additional costs incurred by public communications providers. That is why that terminology is used. I hope that that helps. The noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, asked for more information. Other member states have legislated for internet data. We will obviously watch their experience with interest. We can gain knowledge and understanding from it. The Government are participating actively with the European Commission on issues relating to implementation, particularly to ensure consistency of approach and of interpretation. But we will look at these issues where communication is international. The other points the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, made require further reflection and perhaps a more detailed response. I shall quickly look at this note I have been handed to see whether I can provide some of them. He asked whether we were maintaining or adopting a voluntary regime. The directive is mandatory; the voluntary regime was, I suppose you might say, a British pragmatic approach and solution in its time. Providers want some legal certainty, which the mandatory regime provides. In some ways it is understandable that the industry wants that. It does not want to be forever hanging on to a voluntary code, asking ““Does it mean this?””, ““Does it mean that?””, ““Do we have to do that?”” or ““Are we obliged to provide that?””. It helps to provide a level playing field across the industry. That is of benefit to all. If I have missed something—I have struggled not to—I shall endeavour to provide a note for both noble Lords who have contributed to the debate. I think that I have covered most of the main issues. I am grateful to both noble Lords for their support. On Question, Motion agreed to.