[Portly_Giraffe]

Over the past few days, Florence and I have been in a detailed and I think very productive email exchange with Simon Watkin and Andrew Knight at the Home Office, specifically covering their view of RIPA in relation to the Phorm trials and the proposed Phorm implementation. They were keen to ensure that the points could be established without a free for all, otherwise a conclusion may never be reached.

I recognise there is a danger arising from just a couple of posters being involved in this process. However I think it is justified by the substantial progress we have made, and that quite soon the points formulated will be open for public debate.

The aim is to bring them to a position where they can issue some further public opinions on Phorm and the RIPA, whether via a press release or on here (that's effectively up to them). I hope that we'll have achieved this by early next week.

We're covering about ten points, but as I think we are agreed on the first three I thought I'd share these with you. Please bear in mind that this information is my interpretation of the email exchange, and although I have every reason to believe it is accurate, the Home Office has not approved the wording and so the final version may differ.

1. RIPA provides a statutory framework for regulating the conduct of public authorities which may interfere with individuals’ right to respect for their private and family life under Article 8 of the European Convention of Human Rights.

2. RIPA provides for lawful authority for intercepting communications but also provides for an offence of unlawful interception which any person, absolutely anyone, is able to commit.

3. The Home Office (outside of its immigration functions) is not an investigatory body. It is the role of the police to investigate allegations of unlawful interception.