Right now, I have less objections to ETSI than I did before. These are my own thoughts and not Inspire's. My objections are more regarding communications, cost and politics related rather than technological.
Previously, it was implied (at a TICSA workshop) that any vendor ETSI LI solution costs at least 6 figures. However, since looking in to options it seems the price isn't necessarily going to be that high. So, previously I was trying to avoid the high costs that seemed to be associated with ETSI solutions.
As Peter just stated, from the government's point of view they need something that can stand up in court. ETSI will do this.
However, from the legislation, specifically section 10 and section 40, we should be able to do interception in a 'format that is acceptable to the network operator and the surveillance agency'. I have been trying to work on coming up with that arrangement for a long period of time but with no success.
Section 40 mentions about a standard being gazetted in the future with industry consultation. Plus the police website right currently states 'Although no standards have been Gazetted yet, the European Telecommunications Standards Institute (ETSI) standards and specifications, specific to the type of service to be intercepted, are the standards we are currently working to.'. So, right now everything implies that whilst ETSI is preferred it is not currently the standard.