Yesterday’s post-riots debate in Parliament thrust the role of communications and social media into the spotlight, with suggestions that networks such as BBM should be closed down to prevent rioters communicating. Labour MP Tom Watson called the move “Luddite” and the users of social networking sites erupted in disbelief according to the FT. I was at an Arab IT conference in Damascus earlier this year just after the Egyptian’s closed down their networks. The “hands-off our network.” chatter here does bear a striking resemblance to the chatter there and across the Arab region at the time. But the reality is that things are different here. There is a wider understanding across much, if not most of society of the benefits we enjoy from fast, secure and private communications, and extensive use of social media; from getting a good picture of what’s going on in the street to organising clean-up parties. The Metropolitan Police is using its flickr pages to display images from the disturbances of people they want to identify and Sussex police has 30,000 twitter followers, up from 19,000 a month ago.

Intellect and the tech industry we represent have been working closely with the government since 7/7 to improve intelligence gathering in our connected world, always of course within the legal framework that society has decided it wants. I’d be surprised if, with years of experience of dealing with tech-savvy international criminal gangs and terrorists, the UK authorities need more powers and know-how to deal with communications between rioters. As for turning off the networks – well that really would be Luddite.

Technorati Tags: copycat criminal activity, London riots, Looting and violence, parliament, riot management, rioting, tottenham

At yesterday’s announcement of parliamentary business, there was again no mention of the Postal Services Bill, which means it is very doubtful that the Bill will receive its second reading next week (or the week after).

Alan Duncan, Shadow Leader of the House, asked if the Bill had been lost in the post (I wonder how many post-related puns we can collectively come up with). Harriet Harman, responding, said that space in the parliamentary timetable had to be made to fit in three days of debate on the Parliamentary Standards Bill. It was interesting to note that Ms Harman failed to take the opportunity to reaffirm the Government’s commitment to the Bill (something which they have been quick to do until recently).
(more…)

Technorati Tags: parliament, postal services bill

On 12 May, I highlighted on this blog the problems that the Postal Services Bill might encounter in the House of Commons, following a relatively smooth passage through the Lords. So what has happened since then and is the Government on-course to get the Bill passed before the summer recess?

21 May was the day that things began happening in the Commons with regard to the PSB. On this date, the Bill received its first reading. However, this stage is just a formality and no debate or vote takes place. Now usually what happens after this first stage is that a Bill progresses to its second reading circa two weeks later, at which there is a debate on the principle – rather than the detail – of the Bill. However, no date has been set for the PSB to receive its second reading; given the controversial nature of this Bill, it would appear that time is running out.
(more…)

Technorati Tags: Harriet Harman, parliament, politics, postal services