[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[FYI] (Fwd) Silicon.com: Geeks need a licence: Official
- To: debate@fitug.de
- Subject: [FYI] (Fwd) Silicon.com: Geeks need a licence: Official
- From: "Axel H Horns" <horns@ipjur.com>
- Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 20:09:50 +0200
- Comment: This message comes from the debate mailing list.
- Organization: NONE
- Sender: owner-debate@fitug.de
------- Forwarded message follows -------
From: Owen Blacker <owen.blacker@wheel.co.uk>
To: "UK Crypto list (E-mail)" <ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk>
Copies to: "Anoraks YahooGroup (E-mail)" <anoraks@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Silicon.com: Geeks need a licence: Official
Date sent: Thu, 10 May 2001 11:32:46 +0100
Send reply to: ukcrypto@chiark.greenend.org.uk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
> HEADLINE: Geeks need a licence: Official
> PUBLISHED: 5:01pm on Wednesday 9th May 2001
> CHANNEL: Contractors
> AUTHOR: Sally Watson
> ARTICLE: http://www.silicon.com/a44296
>
> TEXT OF STORY FOLLOWS:
>
> The information security industry has lost its battle to duck
> out of a new security licensing scheme set up by Home
> Secretary Jack Straw.
>
> Home Office minister Charles Clarke pushed the Private
> Security Industry Bill through its final stages yesterday
> afternoon, shortly after the breakup of Parliament was announced.
>
> Opposition MPs backed a last ditch attempt to exempt the IT
> industry from the Bill's proposals to license all security
> contractors, but in a packed chamber, Labour backbenchers
> remained loyal -- rejecting the amendment 315 to 111.
>
> Despite the defeat, Clarke acknowledged the fears raised by
> industry associations including the CBI, the CSSA and the
> Foundation for Information Policy Research.
>
> "It is our fundamental principle to ensure the Bill is
> targeted at those specialist providers of security services
> who we have indicated we want to regulate, and that we do not
> inadvertently catch groups that are not relevant to our
> policy aims," Clarke told MPs.
>
> The Bill is primarily aimed at rogue wheelclampers and
> nightclub bouncers, but according to Clarke the definition of
> security consultant is deliberately broad. "We want it to
> remain usable in the face of changing security systems," he said.
>
> Once the Bill becomes law the government has pledged to hold
> a full consultation via the Department of Trade and Industry
> before it could be applied to information security consultants.
>
> But the assurances are unlikely to satisfy the Bill's
> opponents. A spokesman for the CBI promised to continue
> lobbying to see the legislation corrected.
>
> "Consultation on secondary legislation creates more problems
> than it solves," the CBI said in a statement. "It simply
> obliges the DTI to carry out a consultation in which all
> affected parties - the industry itself and users - are likely
> to say that regulation is unnecessary.
>
> "Given that there has been no demand for regulation in the
> first place, is this a worthwhile use of the DTI's and
> industry's time and resources?"
>
> For related news, see:
> Q. Who are the biggest election losers so far? A. Foxes and
> security workers
> http://www.silicon.com/a44302
> Have you got a licence for that geek?
> http://www.silicon.com/a44191
> IT pros may need licences to work
> http://www.silicon.com/a43615
>
>
> STORY ENDS
>
> For more information on silicon.com go to http://www.silicon.com.
>
> silicon.com - the who, what, when, where and why of ebusiness
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4
Comment: Due to RIP, pls check for revocation before using this key!
iQA/AwUBOvpt6lVeQSYAA2h0EQL+VwCdGvAyESyUc1HXBJ40hUWx3zp3c8kAn3bC
s6r6dT12ULsUBXjC5yApfF0W
=4051
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_____________________________________________________________________
This message has been checked for all known viruses by UUNET delivered
through the MessageLabs Virus Control Centre. For further information
visit http://www.uk.uu.net/products/security/virus/
------- End of forwarded message -------