View source for Wilson Doctrine

{{Short description|UK security protocol introduced in 1966}}
{{about|the communication convention in the United Kingdom|the foreign policy|Wilsonianism|the concept in game theory|Wilson doctrine (economics)}}
The '''Wilson Doctrine''' is a convention in the [[United Kingdom]] that restricts the police and intelligence services from [[telephone tapping|tapping the telephones]] of members of the [[House of Commons of the United Kingdom|House of Commons]] and [[House of Lords]]. It was introduced in 1966 and named after [[Harold Wilson]], the [[Labour Party (UK)|Labour]] [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom|Prime Minister]] who established the rule. Since it was established, the development of new forms of communication, such as [[mobile phone]]s and [[email]], has led to extensions of the doctrine. However, it was never extended to cover members of the new [[Devolution in the United Kingdom|devolved legislatures]].<ref name="dailyrecord">{{cite web |last1=Clegg |first1=David |title=Snoopgate: Scandal of Brit spooks spying on MSPs |url=https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/snoopgate-scandal-brit-spooks-spying-6127095 |website=Daily Record |access-date=23 July 2021 |language=en |date=24 July 2015}}</ref>

For a period, [[Government Communications Headquarters|GCHQ]] chose to also apply the same principle to members of the devolved legislatures,<ref name="dailyrecord"/> but in July 2015 it emerged that the application of the principle to members of the [[European Parliament]] and devolved legislatures had been ended.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.scottishlegal.com/2015/07/24/first-minister-demands-urgent-assurances-from-david-cameron-over-gchq-spying-on-msps/|title=First Minister demands urgent assurances |work=Scottish Legal News|date=24 July 2015 |accessdate=27 July 2015}}</ref>

In October 2015, the [[Investigatory Powers Tribunal]] ruled that the doctrine had no legal force.<ref name=HuffPo /> In November 2015, Prime Minister [[David Cameron]] made a statement clarifying how the "Government continues to apply the doctrine in the twenty first century".<ref>{{cite web|first=David |last=Cameron |author-link=David Cameron |title=The Wilson Doctrine: Written statement |url=http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/written-questions-answers-statements/written-statement/Commons/2015-11-04/HCWS291/|publisher=Parliament of the United Kingdom |accessdate=11 November 2015 |date=4 November 2015}}</ref> The [[Investigatory Powers Act 2016]] requires that warrants to intercept the communications of MPs, Lords, members of the devolved legislatures, or (when they existed) UK MEPs must also gain the [[Powers of the prime minister of the United Kingdom|authorisation of the Prime Minister]].<ref>{{cite news|title=Details of UK website visits 'to be stored for year'|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34715872|accessdate=10 November 2015|work=BBC|date=4 November 2015}}</ref>

== Introduction ==

Following a spate of scandals involving alleged telephone bugging of MPs, Prime Minister [[Harold Wilson]] gave a pledge to MPs that their phones would not be tapped:

{{Quote|With my right hon. Friends, I reviewed the practice when we came to office and decided on balance – and the arguments were very fine – that the balance should be tipped the other way and that I should give this instruction that there was to be no tapping of the telephones of members of Parliament. That was our decision and that is our policy.<ref name=HC1966>HC Deb 17 November 1966 vol 736 cc639</ref>}}

However the pledge was qualified in two respects, as the [[Interception of Communications Commissioner]] made clear in his 2005–06 Annual Report:<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.official-documents.gov.uk/document/hc0607/hc03/0315/0315.pdf|title=Report of the Interception of Communications Commissioner for 2005-2006|author=Interception of Communications Commissioner|id=HC 315 SE/2007/17|accessdate=12 January 2009}}</ref>

{{Quote|But if there was any development of a kind which required a change in the general policy, I would, at such moment as seemed compatible with the security of the country, on my own initiative make a statement to the House about it.<ref name=HC1966/>}}

This meant that the Prime Minister could reverse the doctrine in the interests of national security, and that he did not need to reveal such to the House of Commons until he chose to do so.<ref name=thereg-20150724/>

== Re-assessment ==

Subsequent prime ministers have regularly confirmed that the ban remains in place, but in January 2006 the [[Interception of Communications Commissioner]], [[Swinton Thomas]], asked the government to reconsider the implications of the [[doctrine]] on the regulatory framework established under the [[Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000]]. Prime Minister [[Tony Blair]] confirmed he would be considering whether or not the ban should be lifted, in order to comply with the act.

However, in March 2006 – in a written ministerial statement – Tony Blair said that following a period of fresh consultation, he had decided the 'Wilson doctrine' would remain in place.<ref>{{cite Hansard |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/vo060330/wmstext/60330m07.htm#dpthd_11 |title=Wilson Doctrine |speaker=Tony Blair |position=Prime Minister |jurisdiction=United Kingdom |house=House of Commons |column=95WS |date=30 March 2006 |access-date=18 January 2014}}</ref>

In February 2007, Thomas again called for the ban to be removed,<ref name="cia_factbook">{{cite news |first=Richard |last=Norton-Taylor |newspaper=The Guardian |url=https://www.theguardian.com/frontpage/story/0,,2017037,00.html |title=Watchdog urges end to ban on MP phone taps |date=20 February 2007 |accessdate=4 February 2008 | location=London}}</ref> saying:

{{Quote|It is fundamental to the constitution of this country that no one is above the law or is seen to be above the law. But in this instance, MPs and peers are anything but equal with the rest of the citizens of this country and are above the law.}}

In September 2007 Prime Minister [[Gordon Brown]] reaffirmed the doctrine as "The Wilson Doctrine applies to all forms of interception that are subject to authorisation by Secretary of State warrant."<ref>{{cite Hansard |url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070912/text/70912w0013.htm#subhd_140 |title=Members: Surveillance |speaker=Gordon Brown |position=Prime Minister |jurisdiction=United Kingdom |house=House of Commons |column=2103W |date=12 September 2007 |access-date=18 January 2014}}</ref>

== Public debate ==

In February 2008 it was reported that [[Sadiq Khan]], who was then an MP, had been bugged whilst talking to a constituent in [[Woodhill (HM Prison)|Woodhill Prison]]. However, since this appeared to have been a face-to-face conversation, even if it was bugged, it may not have been a literal breach of the Wilson Doctrine. An inquiry was launched by [[Secretary of State for Justice|Justice Secretary]] [[Jack Straw]].<ref name="BBCN">{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7225556.stm|title=Police 'took MP bugging decision'|date=4 February 2008|work=[[BBC News]]|accessdate=12 January 2009 | location=London |first=Thomas |last=Bell}}</ref>

Further questions about the validity of the doctrine arose in November 2008 after the home and parliamentary offices of [[Damian Green]] MP were searched by the Metropolitan Police.<ref>{{Cite Hansard|url=https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm081208/text/81208w0004.htm#0812081001524|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121003153716/http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm081208/text/81208w0004.htm|url-status=dead|archive-date=3 October 2012|title=Written Answers for 8 December 2008: Prime Minister: Damian Green|speaker=Andrew MacKinlay |author-link=Andrew MacKinlay|column=12W|access-date=8 December 2008}}</ref> Other questions in the Lords asked whether communications which had been stored were protected by the same doctrine.<ref>{{Cite Hansard|url=https://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2008-12-08a.145.0|title=Members of the House: Police Access – Question|author=Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer |author-link=Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer |via=[[TheyWorkForYou]]|column=145 |date=8 December 2008 |access-date=8 December 2008}}</ref>

==2015 Investigatory Powers Tribunal case==
Following the [[Global surveillance disclosures (2013–present)|global surveillance disclosures by Edward Snowden]], three parliamentarians took a case in 2015 to the [[Investigatory Powers Tribunal]] (IPT) that the Wilson Doctrine was being broken.<ref name=thereg-20150723>{{cite news |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/23/galloway_greens_uk_spooks_wilson_doctrine/ |title=Galloway and Greens challenge Brit spooks over dragnet snooping |first=Alexander J. |last=Martin |newspaper=The Register |date=23 July 2015 |accessdate=25 July 2015}}</ref> [[GCHQ]]'s QC argued that the Wilson Doctrine "does not have force in law and cannot impose legal restraints on the agencies", so the doctrine only has a political effect, and that excluding politicians from mass surveillance was not feasible.<ref name=thereg-20150724>{{cite news |url=https://www.theregister.co.uk/2015/07/24/the_wilson_doctrine_is_dead_your_mps_must_be_spied_on_says_qc/ |title=The Wilson Doctrine isn't legally binding, MPs CAN be spied on, says QC |first=Alexander J. |last=Martin |newspaper=The Register |date=24 July 2015 |accessdate=25 July 2015}}</ref><ref name=guardian-20150724>{{cite news |url=https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jul/24/wilson-doctrine-unworkable-bulk-interception-intelligence-agencies |title=MPs can no longer remain exempt from surveillance, lawyers concede |first1=Ian |last1=Cobain |first2=Jamie |last2=Grierson |newspaper=The Guardian |date=24 July 2015 |accessdate=25 July 2015}}</ref> The IPT ruled in favour of GCHQ in October 2015.<ref name=HuffPo>{{cite news|url=http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/10/14/gchq-can-monitor-communic_n_8292390.html|title=GCHQ Can Monitor Communications Of MPs And Peers<!--sic: no comma--> Rules Tribunal|newspaper=Huffington Post|first=Thomas |last=Tamblyn|date=14 October 2015}}</ref> Subsequently, the Home Secretary said in Parliament that the protection of MPs' communications from being intercepted still applies but does not extend to a blanket ban on surveillance.<ref>{{cite web|title=Emergency debate: the operation of the Wilson Doctrine|url=http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2015/october/emergency-debate-the-operation-of-the-wilson-doctrine/|publisher=Parliament|accessdate=8 November 2015|date=16 October 2015}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|title=Wilson Doctrine: MPs' spying protection 'still exists'|url=https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-34574731|accessdate=8 November 2015|work=BBC News|date=19 October 2015}}</ref>

==Investigatory Powers Act 2016==
The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 does not codify the Wilson Doctrine, in that it does not forbid the interception of communications of MPs. However, it does codify the [[Powers of the prime minister of the United Kingdom|prime minister's power]] to maintain or reverse this ban, and adds an extra hurdle to cross before this interception can happen, in that section 26 provides that warrants to intercept the communications of MPs, Lords, and members of the devolved legislatures must also gain the authorisation of the Prime Minister (as well as the relevant Secretary of State and a Judicial Commissioner as for all other IPA warrants). Until [[exit day]] it also applied to members of the European Parliament elected for the UK.<ref>{{cite legislation UK | type = act |year=2016 |chapter=25 |section=26 | act = Investigatory Powers Act 2016}}</ref> This provision came into force on 31 May 2018.<ref>{{cite legislation UK | type = si |year=2018|number=652|regulation=3 | si = The Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (Commencement No. 5 and Transitional and Saving Provisions) Regulations 2018 }}</ref>

==See also==
*[[Harold Wilson conspiracy theories]]
*[[Mass surveillance in the United Kingdom]]
*''[[Spycatcher]]'', a book alleging some staff of [[MI5]] plotted against Harold Wilson's government

==References==
{{Reflist}}

== External links ==
*[http://researchbriefings.parliament.uk/ResearchBriefing/Summary/SN04258 Wilson Doctrine research briefing], House of Commons Library
*[https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/23/what-is-wilson-doctrine-story-behind-mps-protection-snooping What is the Wilson doctrine? The story behind MPs' protection from snooping], The Guardian
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4860850.stm Ban on phone tapping MPs remains], BBC News
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4614122.stm MP phone tap ban 'may be lifted'], BBC News
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7225209.stm No 10 denies MP 'bugging' tip-off], BBC News, Feb 2008
*[http://www.open.edu/openlearn/people-politics-law/politics-policy-people/politics/what-the-wilson-doctrine-the-one-minute-guide The Wilson Doctrine - The one-minute guide], OpenLearn

{{Harold Wilson}}

[[Category:Politics of the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:1966 introductions]]
[[Category:1966 in the United Kingdom]]
[[Category:Telephone tapping]]
[[Category:Harold Wilson]]