I don't think those two statements are contradictory or inconsistent, when you Think Like A Civil Servant . From gov.uk's perspective encryption plays a necess

I don't think those two statements are contradictory or inconsistent, when you Think Like A Civil Servant . From gov.uk's perspective encryption plays a necessary role in enabling the digital economy by encrypting data in transit. They won't interfere with SSL / TLS, for example, because that would chase billions of £ of business out of the UK. But they intend to strong-arm communications providers into giving access to the at-rest data. Whether that is encrypted or not is orthogonal to the discussion; a court order will be served, and the provider will have to respond. Whether the provider is BT or Mr Joe Bloggs hosting his own e-mail is also irrelevant; it will be a criminal offense to fail to respond with the demanded data. Bonus points for GCHQ if this means that providers simply don't encrypt data at rest, for simplicity's sake.