In the context of the Mossack Fonseca Panama Papers scandal, the Paradise Papers, the Bahama Leaks, Apple's double Dutch Irish sandwich tax evasion resulting in Billions of dollars kept offshore for a US company (as a single example of the worldwide problem of corporate tax avoidance), and the complete inability to track company ownership due to 'offshore shell companies', this new attack on encryption doesn't even rate in terms of its ability to make a difference to the problems they say they're trying to solve.

This is targeting individuals. It is phenomenally small-fry when you look at the kind of funds that terrorist group seem to have access to.

Commonwealth Bank, an Australian Bank, failed to report suspicious transactions totalling $77m over the course of a number of months (ref: https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2017/aug/03/commo...)

And this was in breach of existing laws; no new laws were needed to prevent this kind of thing, just enforcement.

Terrorism isn't funded by the little people sending encrypted messages. Terrorism is funded by large groups of people using shell companies to hide their ownership, often funnelling money from legitimate business using loopholes, finding edge-cases.

This is swatting a mosquito with a sledgehammer whilst ignoring the alligator that's already engulfed your leg up to the knee.

If they were serious, they'd be trying to solve the big problems before trimming the fringes.

Again, this is about nation-state power in conflict with multi-national technology corporate power. It's not about terrorism or pedophilia or people smuggling or money laundering, because these measures will have no effect on those things. These new surveillance measures will allow street-corner dealers and casual drug users to be prosecuted whilst the suppliers continue to plough their laundered money into investment portfolios - and isn't that what conservative governments like to see?