PSI Bill 29/3/01 Hansard: That equivocation in full...

[Caspar Bowden]

I think use of the term "tangible asset" is code for fact that HO considers
property to cover intangibles.
--
Caspar Bowden               Tel: +44(0)20 7354 2333
Director, Foundation for Information Policy Research
RIP Information Centre at:    www.fipr.org/rip#media


http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200001/cmhansrd/cm010328/debtext/
10328-06.htm
28 Mar 2001 : Column 974
...

Mr. Clarke:  The hon. Member for Surrey Heath asked about IT security
consultants. I am happy to clarify a point relating to security consultants
that has caused concern in some circles. Schedule 2(5), to which he
referred, extends the provisions to security consultants whose activities
are broadly defined in terms of giving advice about security precautions
against any risk to property or the person.

In keeping with the rest of Bill, that is a BROAD DEFINITION, accompanied by
some clarificatory exemptions. Concern has been expressed about the position
of the information security industry in relation to those definitions. JUST
AS WITH TANGIBLE **ASSETS**, there are REAL THREATS TO THE SECURITY OF
INFORMATION and security advice, and precautions are needed to protect it.

At PRESENT, there is NO REGULATION OF THE INFORMATION SECURITY industry.
However, the Government are committed to regulating only where necessary.
The Department of Trade and Industry will THEREFORE consult the information
security industry on the extent and effectiveness of existing
precautions--protected measures--and WHETHER FURTHER ACTION is required. In
the light of that, I am happy to make it clear that we do not
***CURRENTLY*** intend to bring the information security industry WITHIN THE
SCOPE OF THE NEW LICENSING REGIME established by the Bill.

The Security Industry Authority, when established, will undertake full and
detailed consultations about the discharge of the remits placed on it by the
Bill. NOBODY WILL BE REGULATED by the Bill without their full knowledge and
understanding. All relevant types of security consultant will be invited to
participate in the authority's consultations at the APPROPRIATE TIME

Mr. Hawkins: I am grateful to the Minister for his remarks, which are
helpful to those involved in the information security sector of the IT
industry, but is not he conscious of the fact that the broad wording of
schedule 2(5) may accidentally catch some of those people, even if he does
not intend that it should? Will he undertake further to consider that
wording and whether it might be improved?

Mr. Clarke: I am certainly prepared to LOOK AT the wording, BUT this is a
HISTORIC BILL (HO B*£$%*&@T) for which, as I have said, my right hon. Friend
the Member for Walsall, South has pressed for many years, and I AM KEEN for
its wording to take account of significant changes in the way in which
security is offered. Over the past 20 years, for instance, there have been
considerable changes in the style of security, the approach to security and
the technology that is used. That is why we have adopted a FLEXIBLE STANCE
in the Bill, requiring the Security Industry Authority to REVIEW THE
POSITION and COMMITTING ourselves to consulting the industries concerned. I
acknowledge that the wording of the Bill should relate to what we know now,
in 2001, but in a BROADLY DRAFTED context. That is our rationale, and that
is why I have been able to give the commitments that I have given (??!!).