The report says the cost of the Bill, in terms both of losses
and leakage from the UK economy, and of cost of implementation, may
be in the order of £46 billion in the first five years of
operation. This compares to a government estimate of £640
million.
The contributors include members of The London School of
Economics, the English Law Society and the insurance company
Norwich Union.
The report says "the RIP Bill as it stands is entirely
inadequate as a mechanism to achieve efficient interception and
surveillance of communications and its effect is likely to be loss
of confidence in e-commerce, unacceptable costs to business and to
the UK economy, confusion and uncertainty at numerous levels of
business activity, and an onerous imposition on the rights of
individuals."
It claims that the Bill introduces mass surveillance of internet
activities without judicial warrant or adequate oversight. “The
Bill substantially increases the power of public authorities
without correspondingly increasing the scope for oversight and
accountability.”
Also, it claims it imperils the government's intention of making
Britain the most desirable place to trade electronically.
“As it stands, RIP is likely to create a
legal environment which will inhibit investment, impede the
evolution of e-commerce, impose direct and indirect costs on
business and the consumer, diminish overall trust in e-commerce,
disrupt business-to-business relationships, place UK companies at a
competitive disadvantage, and create a range of legal uncertainties
which will place a growing number of businesses in a precarious
position.”
“There is compelling evidence that the
enactment of RIP will create a trend amongst UK firms to establish
a range of operations offshore, while creating an environment
hostile to the creation of, and investment in, new business
activities in the UK.“
Further, the report claims that the Bill contravenes the
European Convention on Human Rights and possibly the Data
Protection Act.
