Dated November 2015. Print and web pdfs available at https://www.gov.uk/government/publications Web ISBN=9781474125666

[This convenience copy of the official report by the UK Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation, made available under OGLv3 on a cost-only basis] Modern communications networks can be used by the unscrupulous for purposes ranging from cyber-attack, terrorism and espionage to fraud, kidnap and child sexual exploitation. A successful response to these threats depends on entrusting public bodies with the powers they need to identify and follow suspects in a borderless online world. But trust requires verification. Each intrusive power must be shown to be necessary, clearly spelled out in law, limited in accordance with international human rights standards and subject to demanding and visible safeguards. The current law is fragmented, obscure, under constant challenge and variable in the protections that it affords the innocent. It is time for a clean slate. This Report aims to help Parliament achieve a world-class framework for the regulation of these strong and vital powers.

This text provides a clear and accessible introduction to the Investigatory Powers Act, a foundational piece of UK national security law. This act repeals part I, chapters 1 and 2 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 and other surveillance legislation. This new legislation is the blueprint for how state agencies, the police, and internet and telephone companies protect privacy and extract data and information to protect the public from terrorism and is used to prosecute serious criminals. This legislation implements some parts of the recent comprehensive report by David Anderson QC, A Question of Trust: Report of the Investigatory Powers Review, it will put the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014 on a substantive footing and attempt to bring existing legislation up to date to reflect technological advances. The passage of the bill was highly controversial and subject to considerable public criticism by the media and civil liberties and human rights groups as well as lobbying by insiders from the Security Service, the Secret Intelligence Service, GCHQ and the police. The Joint Committee on the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill criticised the Bill's definition of 'data' as "unclear, unhelpful, and recursive" and expressed concerns about the meaning of the term 'Internet Connection Record' as well as the Home Secretary's failure to make sufficient case as to the feasibility of their collection, retention, and use by law enforcement. All of these issues indicate the questions that practitioners will have to face when In the absence of other sources of reliable interpretation for practitioners, this Blackstone's Guide is essential in helping readers navigate and understand the new and complex set of provisions.

This Draft Local Audit Bill, sets out the government's vision for the future of local audit. It has been designed to implement the government's commitment to disband the Audit Commission and re-focus audit on helping local people hold their councils and other local public bodies to account for local spending decisions. The aim of this new draft bill is to develop a locally focused audit regime, but one still retaining a high quality of audit of local government spending. The government views the current audit arrangements for local public bodies as inefficient and unnecessarily centralised, which has created a system of weak cost incentives and therefore become too focused on reporting to central government and not local people. The new audit framework will also allow bodies to appoint their own auditors from an open and competitive market. The Bill also gives new responsibilities to the Financial Reporting Council, which will act as the overall regulator for auditors; the National Audit Office, which will set the code of audit practice; and the professional audit bodies will also have a role in regulating and monitoring audits.

In safeguarding national security the Government produces and receives sensitive information. This information must be protected appropriately, as failure to do so may compromise investigations, endanger lives and ultimately lessen its ability to keep the country safe. The increased security and intelligence activity of recent years has led to greater scrutiny including in the civil courts, which have heard a growing numbers of cases challenging Government decisions and actions in the national security sphere. Such cases involve information that under current rules cannot be disclosed in a courtroom. The UK justice system is then either unable to pass judgment and cases collapse or are settled without a judge reaching any conclusions. This green paper aims to respond to the challenges of how sensitive information is treated in the full range of civil proceedings. It looks for solutions that improve the current arrangements while upholding the Government's commitment to the rule of law. It also addresses the need for public reassurance that the national security work is robustly scrutinised, and that the scrutinising bodies are credible and effective. The proposals in this consultation are in three broad areas: enhancing procedural fairness, safeguarding material and reform of intelligence oversight.

The draft Investigatory Powers Bill was published by the Government on 4 November 2015. Ministers have been clear that the intention of this Bill is to consolidate and clarify existing legislation on the interception of communications and the acquisition of communications data and to modernise the law in the light of developments in communications technologies, in order to maintain the operational capabilities of law enforcement agencies and the intelligence and security services. Previous attempts to legislate in this area have met with criticisms over the lack of consultation with communications service providers (CSPs) on matters of technical feasibility and cost. In our inquiry we have focused on technological aspects of the draft Bill in order to identify the main technological issues involved and how these might affect the communications businesses that will have to collect data and cooperate with the security authorities. If law enforcement agencies and the intelligence and security services are effectively to combat terrorism and serious crime, they must have the means to keep pace with developments in communications. They will doubtless need to continue to deploy a range of methods for intercepting and acquiring information about communications. The evidence we have received suggests there are still many unanswered questions about how this legislation will work in the fast moving world of technological innovation. It is essential that the integrity and security of legitimate online transactions is maintained if we are to trust in, and benefit from, the opportunities of an increasingly digital economy.