From: Hendon David (Tel 0171 2151779) To: ukcrypto@maillist.ox.ac.uk Subject: Re:Unpleasant EU Move on encryption Date: Wed, 11 Mar 1998 13:25:00 +0000 Message-ID: I hesitate to enter this debate, but here goes anyway. First of all, let me say that the directive that Ross mentions is nothing to do with me and is being handled in another bit of DTI as a copyright protection measure. As the guy in DTI responsible for encryption policy though, I would be just as concerned as Ross if the outcome was as he describes. I haven't looked at the documents yet. I gather that the state of negotiation of this directive is that it is under-going its first reading in the Council and the European Parliament (EP). Under the Mastricht co-decision procedure, such directives are decided jointly by both institutions, the Council and the Parliament. The co-decision procedure is as arcane a procedure as I ever met in 30 years in the civil service, but the interesting bit for the moment is what happens to EP amendments. Basically, the Council of Ministers - in this case the Internal Market Council (in practice a working group of experts at my level or lower) and the Parliament (a working group of MEPs) separately consider the text as proposed by the European Commission. Normally both the Council working group and the Parliamentary Group propose amendments to the text. Once the Plenary of the Parliament has approved the amendments, the Council and the Commission decide whether to accept them. The Council adopts as a "common position" a text which subsequently goes again to the EP for a second reading. The EP can propose further amendments and it all gets very difficult then if people don't agree what should go into the text. I will save all that stuff for later. It will certainly be many months away. So if you want to kick into touch amendments proposed in a working group of the EP, you need to persuade the MEPs who are in the working group or, even better, the rapporteur for the directive. I don't know who it is at the moment, but I can find out. If the amendments stay in the report of the group, then the next chance is to get them kicked out when the report of the Group is accepted by the superior committee. I don't know for sure which this is, but it is probably what is called EMAC (I think this is economic and monetary affairs committee - they certainly deal with all the telecomms stuff). If the amendments stay in there, then you need to lobby the members of the EP themselves. You need to get academics in other countries lobbying their MEPs as well, because it wouldn't be enough to convince all UK MEPs. Even if the EP adopt the amendments, it is by no means certain that the Council of Ministers will agree and even if they do the first time round, there is another chance to get the EP to change its position at the second reading. On the face of it, and knowing quite well what other countries' Governments think about encryption, I should have thought the Council of Ministers would never accept these amendments if they really do have the consequences that Ross has outlines because of the implications for European industry in the future. By the way, the common position in the Council can't be before May and the second reading in the EP therefore won't be until the autumn, so there is quite a bit of time to sort this out. I wouldn't hang about though. It is easier to sort out contentious suggestions as they are made, than months later when they have achieved some sort of status. Hope this helps. David Hendon