The package will be put to the party's spring conference, and will include measures to bring the security services under the oversight of a formal parliamentary select committee, as well as measures to introduce judicial oversight of intercept warrants.
The Intelligence and Security Committee (ISC), a group of senior MPs appointed by the prime minister to oversee the security services, issued a call for evidence to its inquiry into whether there is a proper balance between privacy and protection of national security.
But in a sign of the jostling in parliament over the future oversight of the security services, the home affairs select committee, an elected committee of MPs, said it would take extra time to cross-examine the home secretary, Theresa May, next week after she rejected its request to cross-examine the head of MI5, Andrew Parker.
The prime minister also rejected the committee's request to cross-examine his national security adviser, Kim Darroch. The committee is conducting an inquiry into counter-terrorism and cross-examined Alan Rusbridger, the Guardian's editor-in-chief, last week.
May told the home affairs select committee chairman, Keith Vaz, that she had rejected the request for Parker to give evidence because his appearance would "duplicate" the existing oversight provided by the ISC.
David Cameron rejected the request for Darroch to give evidence on the basis that his role focused on providing private advice to him and the national security council and his appearance would "set a difficult precedent".
The prime minister said it should be left to the home secretary to give evidence to the MPs on their concerns about counter-terrorism and the Guardian's disclosures of mass digital surveillance by GCHQ and the US national security agency.
The decision prompted a furious reaction from Vaz, who said: "The prime minister has suggested that the home secretary should come before us to answer our questions and Theresa May is suggesting that it is a matter for the Intelligence and Security Committee. We cannot play pass the parcel on the issue of accountability on these important issues.
"Ministers should take care not to dictate to parliamentary committees which witnesses can be called and for what reasons. Witnesses, no matter how senior, should not be afraid of answering questions from MPs. As a result of this correspondence, our session with the home secretary next Monday will be longer and more detailed than we originally anticipated, and she needs to prepare to come before the committee more often."
Farron, meanwhile, challenged the value of the ISC. He said: "It is a group of the great and good. Experienced hands. 'Sound men' as Sir Humphrey might put it. When the programs systemically collecting your personal information are so secret that even the cabinet are not aware of their existence, our democratic oversight has rescinded to the point of extinction."
Farron and Julian Huppert, a Lib Dem member of the home affairs select committee, met Microsoft, Google and Twitter this week to discuss the common approach the internet firms have been taking in the United States to demand greater privacy for their users.
The Lib Dem president is interested in promoting a digital bill of rights, warning that "pervasive surveillance of our entire digital lives has been allowed to take place without prior knowledge, debate or consent".In its inquiry, the ISC is asking witnesses whether internet communications can be treated differently from other forms of surveillance, such as closed-circuit television cameras.
Source: theguardian.com/
Author: Patrick Wintour and Alan Travis
No comments:
Post a Comment