>>>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30778424
>>>
>>>David Cameron: 'There should be no "means of communication" which "we cannot read."'
>>>
>>>Cryptography vs. Politicians, Act XXXVII ...
>>
>>When we have friendly governments spying on the heads of state of other friendly governments does anyone really still think the privacy of our own communications will be respected in anyway whatsoever? They are just putting into the law books what they have already been doing. Plus the usual soap-boxing and grandstanding on the back of the most recent events.
>
>I think you're missing the point. Currently, if you communicate with me using encryption, GCHQ et. al. can say "Aw shoot, we can't read that one" or demand the key(s) from you to let them read it. Although, in the latter case I believe there are ways to encrypt communications such that the users never know the keys.
>
>The new proposal is that your act of communicating with me using encryption is an offence, unless the government already has the keys.

The burden of proof is on the government. They need to prove that they don't have the keys.