My Lords, I have not been in contact with the implementation unit. It will take as long as it takes. It is doing very detailed work and I am not surprised that it is finding it very difficult, for all the reasons that the noble and learned Lord, Lord Lloyd of Berwick, has heard me bring forward many times in this House. It is an extremely complicated, difficult problem, with a lot of dangers involved.
I will conclude now, because I do not want to make a long speech. As I said in June, I find myself wholly in agreement with the final sentence of a letter from Mobile Broadband Group, which represents the UK businesses of O2, Orange, T-Mobile, Virgin Mobile, Vodafone and 3. The mobile operators form a significant constituent part of the communications services providers, whose importance is frequently recognised in the reports of interception commissioners. The last sentence of the letter states: ""If intercept as evidence is to be introduced into any court (criminal, civil or coroners) it should be done in a comprehensive way, meeting the nine conditions of the Privy Council review in their totality, including a detailed implementation plan which incorporates safeguarding the critical interests of partners’ legitimate needs"."
I could not put it better myself. I oppose the amendment.
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 21 October 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
713 c724-5 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:27:50 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_586682
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_586682
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_586682