UK Eyes New Law as 1885 Telegraph Act Proves Inadequate for Cable Sabotage

The UK government is preparing new legislation to address undersea cable sabotage as current laws are proving inadequate for modern threats. Ministry of Defence parliamentary under-secretary Luke Pollard told lawmakers yesterday that the Submarine Telegraph Act of 1885, which imposes 1,000 pound ($1,370) fines, "does seem somewhat out of step with the modern-day risk."

The government's Strategic Defence Review proposes a new defence readiness bill to cover state-sponsored cybercrime and subsea cable attacks. Chris Bryant, minister of state for data protection and telecoms, said fines could be increased to 5,000 pound ($6,850) through secondary legislation but "that just doesn't seem to meet the needs of the situation."

Recent incidents include Sweden's deployment of forces to the Baltic Sea following suspected Russian attacks on underwater data cables in January. The China Strategic Risks Institute found that eight of ten identified vessels in 12 sabotage incidents between January 2021 and April 2025 were linked to China or Russia through registration or ownership.

Yes

[pele]

Let us address undersea optical cable sabotage and not worry about daily copper cable thefts around the country. Go Keir!

Re:

[PPH]

I don't know about the UK, but in the USA, copper thefts are commited by drug addicts*. And as they are a protected species and communications and power cables are a significant resource necessary for their survival, nothing can be done.

*They actually harvest fiber optic cabling and aluminum high voltage conductors as well, being unable to distinguish between these and copper.

Re:

[Z00L00K]

The court system has to protect their source of income. If every criminal is behind bars then the courts wouldn't have much to do. So release them, rinse and repeat.

Re:

[sabbede]

Is the Ministry of Defense responsible for prosecuting copper thefts? I don't know all that much about the division of authority/responsibility in the UK legal system.

Re:

[mjwx]

Let us address undersea optical cable sabotage and not worry about daily copper cable thefts around the country. Go Keir!

At the risk of debunking your anti-labour rant, the big issue with undersea fibre optic cabling is less sabotage and more stupidity and greed. The biggest problem are anchors being dragged over cables, ships are not supposed to anchor near cables but do so anyway because they're not paying attention or just don't care. This provides ample camouflage for the smaller amount of deliberate sabotage attempts.

If you're that concerned about copper theft, you really should have thought about that before voting T

So...

[Valgrus Thunderaxe]

The people cutting these cables care about the laws in the UK?

Re:

[karmawarrior]

They care about being punished if they're caught, yes, but only if the punishment is something somewhat more than 5000 quid.

Re:

[ArchieBunker]

They're going to fine the boat operating from one country, flying the flag of another, manned by a crew from yet a third country, while the owner of the boat lives in a fourth country. That sums up maritime law. 1885 era fines are a bit comical.

Re:

[taustin]

I recall a news story about a contractor who severed the major fiber trunk line between Los Angeles and Las Vegas with a backhoe because he didn't call Dig Alert. He was facing life in prison, and millions in fines.

It's odd when the US is ahead of the curve on something like this.

Old Laws

[Roger W Moore]

That's the problem with old laws in the UK. Some of them have become ridiculously lenient, like ones imposing financial penalties that a centuriy and a half of inflation has rendered largely meaningless. However, some others allowed exceptionally harsh penalties - specifically the death penalty - to remain at least a theoretical punishment for crimes like piracy, treason and some military offences until 30 years after the death penalty was "abolished" [wikipedia.org].

Fortunately, with them being old laws piracy was defi

Re:

[sabbede]

They don't need to. They can "arrest" the ship, charging it with the crime of intentionally damaging the cables and seizing it under Civil Forfeiture. Assuming that it works the same way that it does in the US, which I think it does.

That's what they used to do with pirate ships.

DSWM

[Tablizer]

Russians are afraid they'll get a very sternly worded memo from the UK. The Department of Sternly Worded Memos has a notorious reputation.

Rumor is a distraught memo reader choked on a crumpet last year, and made the grieving family pay for the crumpet by selling an autographed cricket bat.

Re:

[GoTeam]

Who is going to protect us from our own state spying on us?

No one. You have to do it yourself. Unfortunately we're massively outgunned...

I know a solution

[FudRucker]

It is simple and effective, call undersea cable sabotage an act of war and send the Navy out to sink the ships that are caught doing it

Re:

[sabbede]

What if it's an Italian cruise ship that accidentally dropped anchor in the wrong spot? You need to discern accident from malice. Then there's the issue of the likely antagonist being Russia, so that war ends poorly for all.

So, call it a criminal act and seize (not sink) the offending ship. I assume the American Civil Forfeiture rule comes from the UK in the first place, so it would be in keeping with existing law and precedent to charge the ship itself with the crime and keep it. Civil Forfeiture was

"Current laws"

[devslash0]

They seem surprised. Despite the year 1885 on the box.

For a limited time only...

[cosmicl]

Cable Hunting Permits! Only 1000 British pounds!