The RIP Act: What the parties say

With less than a week to go before the election, leading politicians have admitted industry support will make or break police powers to snoop on criminal activity on the internet.

"The government has recognised it can't actually do anything without industry co-operation," said Richard Allen, chair of the IT select committee and Liberal Democrat candidate for Sheffield Hallam.

"The industry holds the key because the government hasn't got the technical ability to snoop on ISPs. If they try and force them, they'll simply leave the country," Allen warned.

On the campaign trail in Leicester, e-minister Patricia Hewitt admitted plans by the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) and the Council of the EU to store traffic data are unworkable. "Some of the proposals that have been made for data retention simply aren't practical and will fall for that reason," she said.

"Charles Clarke and I have made it quite clear that we have no proposals to mandate data retention for seven years," she added.

Hewitt accepted mistakes had been made with the Home Office sponsored Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, "but we sat down with industry and listened to the criticisms," she said. "Now I think we've got the balance right."

But Conservative shadow DTI minister Alan Duncan disagreed. "This Act has gone too far and a lot of businesses are going to face costs. The power to intrude and keep data has gone too far."

David Heathcoat-Amory, Tory shadow trade secretary, blamed Home Office bullying. "The DTI was weak in this as in everything else," he claimed.

Both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats have made manifesto pledges to review the legislation, but stop short of promising to scrap the Act altogether.

John Higgins, director general of the CSSA, believes common ground can be found. "The industry is right behind ensuring [criminals] can't exploit the technology. We can work with government to explain what is possible and realistic at realistic prices," he said.

"I think we all need to be a bit more honest about our conflicting objectives," added Allen.

What the manifestos say:

Conservative:
"The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act seeks to give crime fighters updated powers of interception to catch ever more sophisticated criminals, especially those using the internet and email. We support this aim, but are deeply concerned about the financial cost to businesses of compliance, and the impact it may have on business confidence. On taking office the next Conservative government will review the operation of the RIP Act and ensure that it is not having an unacceptable effect on business."

Labour:
No specific mention but does promise to ensure regulation, where necessary, is as light-touch as possible. "We will time limit regulation where appropriate, deregulate by secondary legislation, offer help to small firms, and examine reforms that support conciliation in the workplace and avoid resort to litigation."

Liberal Democrat:
"We will amend many aspects of the RIP Act - there should be a right to privacy but this is not an absolute right. As with telephones, there must be some carefully circumscribed conditions within which - for example - the activities of organised crime or paedophile rings can be traced. However the RIP Act is unnecessarily intrusive."