---

Intelligence and Security Committee: Annual Report 2007–08

I was absolutely spot on at the start when I predicted that we would have a very well informed and comprehensive debate. I am pleased to say that I can be very brief in my reply, mainly because the Minister has answered all the awkward questions, for which I am grateful. I want to mention just one or two points in relation to intercept as evidence. It is very interesting that we had the two sides of the argument in our debate today. As the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Jones, rightly said, it is a question of two public goods and, as the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, said, of putting prisoners in jail but not in any way jeopardising our national security. I think that everyone here recognises that there is a debate to be had there. They will also recognise that the role of the Intelligence and Security Committee is to look at protecting national security and that other people can put the other argument. We also had a fascinating debate about whether the committee might meet in public. The committee does have the ability to meet in public but, because of the nature of the information that we get, so far we have not done so. However, we are looking at that and, if a suitable subject presented itself, we would consider doing it. On a number of occasions, the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Jones, urged the committee to do various things. I do not want to give away any secrets—that would be entirely inappropriate—but the people on the committee whom she has to urge are those from her own party, as I think she probably recognises. When we went to the Home Office, we were very impressed by what is now being done in relation to the Prevent strategy. A step-change has taken place compared with what we saw originally, and I think that noble Lords will see that reflected in our next report. The noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, perceptively picked up one of the key points concerning the Professional Head of Intelligence Analysis being a separate job. Again, I think that noble Lords will find that that matter is raised in our next report. The Committee may not be surprised to hear that a member of the Intelligence and Security Committee who is also a member of the Butler committee ensures that that matter is discussed regularly. We looked at the issue of the Defence Intelligence Staff very carefully before commenting, and we received assurances from the chief of defence intelligence and from the Secretary of State that the cuts would not impact on analytical capacity. However, I assure the Committee that we will be monitoring this very matter carefully and, again, it will be covered in our next report. I am building up excitement about the next report because, again, SCOPE will be covered in more detail in our next annual report. As the Minister said, there is currently a dispute between the Government and the supplier. It would be entirely wrong to go into more detail, as the Minister was right to say. Although I never like to do this, perhaps I may correct the Minister slightly on one point. We have not started to look at the protocol for questioning but are about to do so. We have the existing arrangements for all the services; very shortly we will get the consolidated arrangements and we will look at those in full detail. I said in my introduction—I see that the noble Lord, Lord King, a former chairman of the committee, is now here—that one of the encouraging things is that we now have extra resources. We will be getting not one but three investigators to carry out work on our behalf, although they will not all be full-time. I see the noble Baroness, Lady Manningham-Buller, worrying about her successor being questioned. The noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Jones, said that the Government are not taking the committee and its reports seriously. With the greatest respect, that is not the case, and every member of the committee, of whatever party, would say that. Just because the Government do not agree with everything the committee says does not mean that it is not being taken seriously. They take it seriously—the reply from the Minister has indicated that today. I look forward—and I shall still be here because an election will not affect Members of this House—to participating, in whatever capacity, in the next debate. I hope that my noble friend Lord Brett, the Whip, will not give me a row for saying it, but I hope that next time we will manage to have the debate on the Floor of the House to allow more people to participate fully in it. Motion agreed.