Agenda item

2:30

The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 ('the Act') regulates the use of covert activities by Local Authorities. It creates the statutory framework by which covert surveillance activities may be lawfully undertaken. Special authorisation arrangements need to be put in place whenever a Local Authority considers commencing covert surveillance or considers obtaining information by the use of informants or officers acting in an undercover capacity.

Codes of Practice issued under the Act provide guidance to authorities on the use of the Act. The Code of Practice relating to covert surveillance specifies that elected members should review the authority's use of the Act and set the policy at least once a year. They should also consider internal reports on the use of the Act periodically.

This paper (AG9) provides an overview of the use of activities falling within the scope of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 by Oxfordshire County Council in the period from April 2014 to March 2015. The report also provides an overview of the authority's Policy and the full policy is provided as an annex for committee members to review.

RECOMMENDATION

The Committee is RECOMMENDED to consider and note the periodic and annual use of RIPA by Oxfordshire County Council.

The Committee had before them a report (AG9) which provided an overview of the use of activities falling with the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 by Oxfordshire County Council in the period from April 2014 to March 2015.

Kate Davies, Team Leader, Trading Standards, introduced the report and explained that the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (‘the ACT’) regulated the use of covert activities by Local Authorities. It created the statutory framework by which covert surveillance activities may be lawfully undertaken. She added that the Act was in place to ensure that Authorities comply with the Human Rights Act.

Ms Davies explained that the use of covert surveillance under the Act was subject to the approval of a Magistrate who must take into account the necessity of the action to be taken, the proportionality of the action and the potential for collateral intrusion into the privacy of others not related to the investigation before granting approval.

The Committee heard that during 2014/15 the Council authorised covert surveillance on 4 occasions, three of which were related to investigations carried out by Trading Standards and one relating to an internal investigation. Ms Davies also informed the Committee that the Council had collected subscriber details on 22 occasions but that these all related to the same case.

Members took the opportunity to congratulate the Trading Standards department on its work.

Dr Jones pointed out that the Policy attached to the report stated that the Committee would receive a quarterly report on the use of the Act, but that, although the Committee had delegated that function to the Audit Working Group (AWG), as Chairman of that group he had never received such a report.

Ian Dyson, Chief Internal Auditor, answered that if there were any actions to report, they should be reported to the Chairman of the AWG and if it is deemed necessary they should then be put on the agenda for the AWG. However, since there was often little to report, it was likely that this had lapsed.

Peter Clark, County Solicitor and Monitoring Officer, stated that this needed to be reinstated and added that, since the Monitoring Officer would authorise requests for a Magistrate’s approval for use of the Act, the Monitoring Officer should report to the Chairman of the AWG after each instance.

Councillor Bartholomew enquired why the use of routine test purchases was not reported. Ms Davies explained that intelligence regarding underage sales had to be responded to as appropriate and that this may include a visit to the trader or a report to the Police. She added that the Code of Practice only enabled the use of covert surveillance after overt action had failed. However, she added that this guidance had recently been amended to enable Authorities to consider the use of covert actions at an earlier stage and that the Council was planning to carry out underage test purchases in the near future.

Mr Clark concluded that the use of covert surveillance needed to be carried out with a clear intention and that the results of each investigation must be disclosed whatever the findings.

Following a question relating to the investigation set out in Paragraph 11 of the report, Ms Davies confirmed that the sentencing of those found guilty of offences under consumer protection legislation was now scheduled for the end of September 2015.

RESOLVED:  to note the periodic and annual use of RIPA by Oxfordshire County Council subject to receiving an Annual Update report.