Investigatory Powers Bill — Clause 15 — Warrants for the Interception or Examination of the Communications of an Organisation — 6 Jun 2016 at 23:01

The majority of MPs voted to allow a warrant for the interception or examination of communications to apply to an organisation's communications, rather than just to specific individuals or premises.

MPs were considering the Investigatory Powers Bill.[1]

The amendment rejected by the majority of MPs in this vote was:

  • Amendment: 267, page 12, line 3, leave out “or organisation”

The amendment was accompanied by an explanatory note stating:

  • These amendments would retain the capacity of a single warrant to permit the interception of multiple individuals but would require an identifiable subject matter or premises to be provided. This narrows the current provisions which would effectively permit a limitless number of unidentified individuals to have their communications intercepted.

Had it not been rejected the amendment would have impacted Clause 15[2] of the Bill titled Subject-matter of warrants which began:

  • (1) A warrant under this Chapter may relate to—
  • (a) a particular person or organisation, or
  • (b) a single set of premises.
  • (2) In addition, a targeted interception warrant or targeted examination warrant may relate to—
  • (a) a group of persons who share a common purpose or who carry on, or may carry on, a particular activity;
  • (b) more than one person or organisation, or more than one set of premises, where the conduct authorised or required by the warrant is for the purposes of a single investigation or operation;
  • (c) testing or training activities.

The clause relates to warrants for the interception of communications, or the examination of the content of communications already obtained. The amendment would have prevented a warrant applying to an organisation.


Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit free service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your electricity and/or gas to Bulb Energy who provide 100% renewable electricity and tend to be 20% cheaper than the 'Big Six'. They'll also pay any exit fees (up to £120) from your old supplier AND give you (and us) a £50 credit for joining up via our Bulb Referral Link.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Con263 (+2 tell) 1080.6%
DUP6 0075.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent0 1033.3%
Lab0 200.9%
LDem0 7087.5%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 2066.7%
SNP0 50 (+2 tell)096.3%
UUP2 00100.0%
Total:271 67053.2%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

David DavisHaltemprice and HowdenConaye

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

PublicWhip v2 codebase is currently under development - you can join the Slack group to find out more or email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive