The report says the cost of the Bill, in terms both of losses and leakage from the UK economy, and of cost of implementation, may be in the order of £46 billion in the first five years of operation. This compares to a government estimate of £640 million.
The contributors include members of The London School of Economics, the English Law Society and the insurance company Norwich Union.
The report says "the RIP Bill as it stands is entirely inadequate as a mechanism to achieve efficient interception and surveillance of communications and its effect is likely to be loss of confidence in e-commerce, unacceptable costs to business and to the UK economy, confusion and uncertainty at numerous levels of business activity, and an onerous imposition on the rights of individuals."
It claims that the Bill introduces mass surveillance of internet activities without judicial warrant or adequate oversight. “The Bill substantially increases the power of public authorities without correspondingly increasing the scope for oversight and accountability.”
Also, it claims it imperils the government's intention of making Britain the most desirable place to trade electronically.
“As it stands, RIP is likely to create a legal environment which will inhibit investment, impede the evolution of e-commerce, impose direct and indirect costs on business and the consumer, diminish overall trust in e-commerce, disrupt business-to-business relationships, place UK companies at a competitive disadvantage, and create a range of legal uncertainties which will place a growing number of businesses in a precarious position.”
“There is compelling evidence that the enactment of RIP will create a trend amongst UK firms to establish a range of operations offshore, while creating an environment hostile to the creation of, and investment in, new business activities in the UK.“
Further, the report claims that the Bill contravenes the European Convention on Human Rights and possibly the Data Protection Act.