It is patriotic to encrypt your data
Seems to me that if you're a patriotic, law abiding citizen, then it's only beneficial to the security services if you encrypt your traffic to avoid it being logged.
If you're not doing anything illegal, then all that data that's logged about your traffic is noise. Its just extra stuff that has to be captured, stored, indexed, archived, backed-up, secured and (hopefully) eventually deleted. In a time critical situation, having terabytes of guff to crawl through is a waste. Capturing all that data is the equivalent of phoning the police each time you nip out down the shops, just to keep them in the loop; it would just be boring data that clogged up the system. If they're not interested in our law-abiding traffic, then it's no loss to them if it's not stored. Far better to use the saved £££ on specialist teams (no doubt wielding zero-day exploits) and physical surveillance to go after the bad guys.
Some may say that you don't have a problem if they know you've gone to www.facebook.com. However, you're not just connecting to there. A quick look at facebook now shows me connecting to static.xx.fbcdn.net, scontent-lhr3-1.xx.fbcdn.net, fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net, fbstatic-a.akamaihd.net, fbcdn-photos-c-a.akamaihd.net and fbcdn-photos-b-a.akamaihd.net - and that's with AdBlock+ active. Are you *sure* that there's no hokey content on any of those sites? Do you really feel happy if you're traffic is tagged because one of those sites is hosting something questionable? Throw in advertising sites and malware, and the number of sites you connect to becomes very big and very uncontrolled.
The thick (and "presently" unlikely) end of this particular wedge is cameras in your house. After all, your bog is probably a "safe space", and the PM doesn't like giving evil-doers safe spaces. Sure, the film would be encrypted, just stored for a year (by your oh-so-secure ISP) and only available under special circumstances, but ask yourself - would you be happy being filmed taking a dump?
Added to all this, if the UK demands that Google, Apple and others are required to provide backdoors, then you can bet your bottom dollar that the Russians, Chinese, Indians, Saudis and just about every other nation will demand the same. Very soon, the service providers security will be riddled with nation state holes. So what if GCHQ keeps its access keys under super-duper security - a smallish bribe in Bombay or Moscow may be all you need for access. Security is limited by the weakest link, and once governments of all flavours have access, your security (and that of every UK business) is open to the highest bidder. Our patriotic duty is the ensure the security of the UK economy, and that means not letting other nations sniff through our data. If the UK bans end-to-end encryption, then we will put ourselves at a massive economic disadvantage as less scrupulous actors take advantage.
If you're in the UK and are suspected of serious crimes, RIPA already gives plod the power to demand your data. If you don't off to the clink for you. If you're not in the UK, well, your traffic data may not be logged in a means accessible by plod/GCHQ. Why would this bill give us any additional security?
DNSCrypt, Tor, SSL, PGP - these are the tools of patriots!