Council use of RIPA needs to be reined in, says Government

RIPA allows public bodies such as the police to conduct surveillance in major crime-fighting and anti-terrorism cases. But it has also been used for surveillance by local authorities investigating such trivial problems as refuse collection and dog fouling.

"There have been some cases where RIPA has been clearly misused," said a Home Office statement announcing a public consultation on planned changes.

"There have been a number of occasions recently when public authorities have used techniques under RIPA when most people would have regarded it as inappropriate to do so," said the consultation itself.

"We must ensure that the police and other public authorities have the powers they need. But we must also ensure that those powers are not used inappropriately or excessively," said Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. "The government has absolutely no interest in spying on law-abiding people going about their everyday lives. I don't want to see these powers being used to target people for putting their bins out on the wrong day or for dog fouling offences."

The Government wants to replace existing codes of practice with new ones with stricture rules on when RIPA surveillance should be used.

Police and intelligence agencies can carry out more serious and intrusive surveillance into what happens in private, but local authorities can carry out surveillance on what happens in public. They can only do so legally under RIPA if that action is "necessary and proportionate".

There has been recent controversy over councils' use of surveillance powers for trivial purposes. One council spied on a family for three weeks to ensure they lived in a school's catchment area, and bin men have been reprimanded when spotted taking unauthorised trade waste.

The public will have the chance to tell the Government if it thinks that authorisation for surveillance should have to come from more senior staff in councils than is currently the case, and if it should always involve the approval of an elected official.

Smith said in the consultation paper that she believed councils should retain some surveillance powers.

"Those responsible for ensuring that taxpayers’ money is not abused by benefit cheats can use surveillance under RIPA to follow and film someone in public places," she said. "They might do that if the person has claimed disability benefits for many years on the basis that he cannot walk long distances, but he actually spends his free time competing in marathons – as has actually happened. In my view, this is entirely appropriate. It’s just common sense."

"But I share concerns about how a small number of local authorities have used techniques under RIPA when most of us would say it was not necessary or proportionate for them to do so. As I have made clear, I do not think it is right for RIPA to be used to investigate offences relating to dog-fouling or to see whether people put their bins out a day early. This, too, is just common sense," she said.