Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000
Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
74 Warrants under the Intelligence Services Act 1994.
(1) In subsection (2) of section 5 of the Intelligence Services Act 1994 (the circumstances in which the Secretary of State may issue a warrant authorising interference with property or wireless telegraphy)— (a) in paragraph (a), for “on the ground that it is likely to be of substantial value in” there shall be substituted “for the purpose of”; and (b) for paragraph (b) there shall be substituted— (b) is satisfied that the taking of the action is proportionate to what the action seeks to achieve; . (2) After that subsection, there shall be inserted— (2A) The matters to be taken into account in considering whether the requirements of subsection (2)(a) and (b) are satisfied in the case of any warrant shall include whether what it is thought necessary to achieve by the conduct authorised by the warrant could reasonably be achieved by other means. (3) In each of sections 6(1)(b) and 7(5)(b) of that Act (warrants issued under the hand of a senior official of the Secretary of State’s department), the words “of his department” shall be omitted. (4) In section 11 of that Act (interpretation), for paragraph (1)(d) there shall be substituted— (d) “senior official” has the same meaning as in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000; .
74 Warrants under the Intelligence Services Act 1994.
(1) In subsection (2) of section 5 of the Intelligence Services Act 1994 (the circumstances in which the Secretary of State may issue a warrant authorising interference with property or wireless telegraphy)— (a) in paragraph (a), for “on the ground that it is likely to be of substantial value in” there shall be substituted “for the purpose of”; and (b) for paragraph (b) there shall be substituted— (b) is satisfied that the taking of the action is proportionate to what the action seeks to achieve; . (2) After that subsection, there shall be inserted— (2A) The matters to be taken into account in considering whether the requirements of subsection (2)(a) and (b) are satisfied in the case of any warrant shall include whether what it is thought necessary to achieve by the conduct authorised by the warrant could reasonably be achieved by other means. (3) In each of sections 6(1)(b) and 7(5)(b) of that Act (warrants issued under the hand of a senior official of the Secretary of State’s department), the words “of his department” shall be omitted. (4) In section 11 of that Act (interpretation), for paragraph (1)(d) there shall be substituted— (d) “senior official” has the same meaning as in the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000; .
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Sign in to file itThink it through
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.