On 13 November, the UK House of Lords unexpectedly approved a very controversial 'Snoopers' Charter'. The three pieces of secondary legislation approve a 'voluntary' data retention scheme, and give a long list of government agencies self-authorised access to phone and Internet logs.

Throughout the debate it appeared that the government's proposals to place every UK email and phone account under surveillance was doomed. Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Cross Bench peers had vowed to oppose them. The Joint Human Rights Committee of the Parliament had expressed 'grave reservations' about the plans. Independent legal analysis had ruled them unlawful. Grim faced Home Office Officials sitting in the Advisors Box of the Lord's had admitted they were expecting the worst. But in spite of all that, at the eleventh hour the government snatched victory from the jaws of defeat.

EDRI-members Privacy International and the Foundation for Information Policy Research, which have campaigned to defeat the proposals, were delighted that two important motions were approved by the Lords.

Lord Phillips proposed that the Interception of Communications Commissioner must let people know when their privacy has been improperly invaded. In the past no such disclosure was made.

Baroness Blatch also succeeded in a groundbreaking motion requiring the government to report to Parliament the extent of overseas access to personal information stored by communications providers. Such access is widespread, and available to many developed and developing countries.

However, despite these successes, Privacy International commented: "A government ignoring adverse findings from the Parliament's own Human Rights watchdog is something we would have expected from a Banana Republic. This is a shameful episode".

(Contribution by Ian Brown, FIPR)