UK.gov has outsourced tech policy to Ofcom because it is clueless – SNP techie The UK government has effectively outsourced its policy-making to Blighty's comms watchdog Ofcom because MPs are clueless about telecoms and technology. That's according to Calum Kerr, the Scottish National Party's spokesperson for digital stuff. Speaking to The Register, Kerr also accused the government, BT and Ofcom of …
having spent 10 years at telecoms company Nortel - before it was bought by Avaya following its bankruptcy.
Good track record then.
He became an MP last year
I suppose we shouldn't be surprised.
Kerr concedes he does not have deep technical knowledge...he was subsequently given the digital brief
Did they never think of finding someone in industry who does have deep technical knowledge? Or are they all keeping their heads down?
[blockquote]Did they never think of finding someone in industry who does have deep technical knowledge? Or are they all keeping their heads down?[/blockquote]
Maybe the techies enjoy being technical and aren't interested in drafting policy documents and PowerPoint
On the topic of his knowledge, I guess at least he has worked in telecoms (albeit probably not intechnical roles according to a brief bio that notes his degree in History, and work roles of "account manager", "practice consultant" and "practice leader".
I was amused by "a more informed Parliament could allow it to make bolder, more creative decisions about the market" as I could see Jim Hacker saying something like that, much to Sir Humphrey's disgust.
"Did they never think of finding someone in industry who does have deep technical knowledge? Or are they all keeping their heads down?"
As someone within the industry who has technical knowledge - always beware of anyone who claims to have *deep* technical knowledge I know some of the best in the industry and we all have blind spots.
Becoming a politician doesn't interest me. Firstly there would be the mahoosive salary cut to become an MP and then there's the element of having to mix with pond slime. I meet cabinet ministers and other assorted politicians on a regular basis at conferences and "industry events". It's clear that even when they are asking your opinion they don't want it and their minds are already made up. What they are after is positive stroking; a number of industry clowns to say "Ooh minister your ideas are *brilliant*." and then some nameless droids to "make it so".
If their "idea" is terminally clueless, ignorant and damaging to UK infrastructure they will carry on regardless and will be able to have their own way because there is no effective scrutiny in Select Committees or either of the Houses of Parliament.
For example they consider Martha Lane Fox, Baroness Lane-Fox of Soho and Diana Mary "Dido" Harding, Baroness Harding of Winscombe to be technical savants. I suspect both of them would struggle to know which way up to hold an iPad.
There is a solution which is the "expert committee" which is how several administrations around the world handle technical issues. In recent years the Republicans in the USA have resented this approach, preferring to prohibit experts from providing impartial advice and promoting the use of malleable "experts" who are in the grip of major corporations looking to lock out the competition. I suspect that over a decade or so they will be bitten by "branded advice" which is not even in the long-terms interests of the companies giving the advice.
>As someone within the industry who has technical knowledge - always beware of anyone who claims >to have *deep* technical knowledge I know some of the best in the industry and we all have blind >spots.
Exactly. One thing that most reasonably intelligent people learn very early in their careers is that they will never know everything. People who claim to know everything generally don't and merely know how to talk a lot. This goes for politicians, all the way up to the prime minister. Can we expect her to know everything? Of course not.
Much as I dislike the SNP, hats off to this guy for being an honest politician, in this respect at least.
As for the OP's comments, it wasn't the techies who brought down Nortel. Many very clever people worked there.
"People who claim to know everything generally don't and merely know how to talk a lot"
Indeed. The moment someone declares themselves an expert I tend to automatically translate that into "I know more than most of the general public, but I have fixed views and stopped learning the day I decided I knew anything - so you can't point out anything in what I propose as a flaw and expect me to listen to you (even if the sky does subsequently fall in).
Totally agree with what someone posted about - the best people I work with all know that in order to learn, you have to be prepared to make mistakes. If you don't admit to making mistakes, then how can you learn?
"As for the OP's comments, it wasn't the techies who brought down Nortel. Many very clever people worked there."
I'm sure my wife will thank you.
I recall being very impressed by their Apple-based PABX kit in the early 90s, back in the days when corporates and government still had operators to intercept and direct calls. The Nortel kit had a whizzy 3-D interface with an Oracle directory and a scripted interface for the operators. A caller would hear things like "ICI Alderley Park, how can I help you" or "ICI Mond Division, how can I help you" but all the calls were handled at one central location. Also the directory lookup was fast, finding users from just a few characters. All the connections were drag and drop. It's a shame that voicemail and direct dial took over.
As for the OP's comments, it wasn't the techies who brought down Nortel. Many very clever people worked there.
I didn't say it was, I worked with those guys (they were our customers), and they were very good indeed. It seemed, though, that Mr Kerr wasn't a techie, in which case the comment about him being there until they went bust doesn't seem to speak well for his career.
I presume from all the downvotes, followed by lots of people agreeing with me, that I didn't get my point across very well. Sorry.
Nortel UK R&D had some stellar developers.
The company I worked for at the time picked up quite a few and all but one of them were top notch. Even that one which was not top notch was still above average, just not into development. In her career development plan writing software was a short and interim phase before becoming a PHB - something she by hook or by crook did later on.
The BIG Nortel mistake was believing in the technoreligious tripe being spouted out of Adastral Park around the inception of 21CN and delivering on it. NO OTHER VENDOR did. That resulted in them having invested an ungodly amount of resources into flogging the PBB-TE dead horse - enough to bankrupt the company despite other bits of it not doing that bad at the time.
So hearing from an ex-Nortel techie that BT is a part of an unholy alliance... Well, I can only smile at this one. On one level, he has a point - the revolving door between BT, Ofcom and the government is spinning at several K RPM all the time. On another level, there is probably some nicely fermented old bad blood here as well.
Nortel was on the skids well before 21cn and PBT-TE. More to do with the near-fraudulent 'leasing' of equipment as part of the 2000 internet bubble burst. Pretty much the same fate as Lucent.
Mind you if we're concentrating on BT then yes you could blame them and 21CN for the demise of Marconi and letting Huawei into the UK telecoms scene
Ofcom is pretty much only interested in raising revenue, they are in thrall to Mobile Operators and support mobile over all other applications of spectrum.
They promote DAB.
They ignore gadgets, PSUs and Lamps creating RFI, as they support Corporates, not consumer.
If they are technically expert, management does their best to muzzle them.
They've not acquitted them selves terribly well re: power-line Ethernet either.
I realise it's a complex problem: a useful new technology that does indeed splat interference everywhere, but some planning and reaching comprises re: power or available bandwidth is surely possible?
This post has been deleted by its author
It's simply a transmitter, it's tested by using only one or having no data.
It will work across 3m of airgap easily, i.e. test on a genny, car inverter or unplugged UPS. The lighting wiring is often a loop, not a pair, thus is an aerial. The meter / Consumer unit has little effect.
Amusingly it can interfere with DSL, and be blocked by phone chargers lacking RF filters. Unfiltered (or poor) LED SMPSU, PC PSU, CFL or tube Electronic Ballast can "wipe" out MW & SW radio up to 20m away as well as block so called power-line Ethernet. The faster power-line Ethernet units interfere with FM radio and VHF Airband.
The faster power-line Ethernet units interfere with FM radio and VHF Airband as well as MW and SW blocked by all power-line Ethernet adaptors.
There is no possible compromise other than using licensed spectrum or pre-licensed such as ISM (which includes the two wifi bands).
Similarly the proposal to let commercial Mobile (LTE) use ISM (WiFi bands) is an money grab.
The so called "White Space" interferes with TV. It should never be legalised. I can't see it being allowed on Mobile Bands. Unless EVERY TV receiver connected to the Internet in real time, the so called cognitive radio White space with or without a database won't work. Even if it did, WiFi on ISM shows that people will add 20dB gain aerials, power amps and even disable database access.
Ofcom, Comreg and FCC have all shown themselves to be partisan and technically lacking. Comreg can take a year to remove an RF interference source. Priority is given to Mobile, Local Councils and big business.
Both Ofcom and Comreg (with no consultation) aim to close Terrestrial TV. The 700MHz band sell off means no hope of more transmitters for mobile reception, 3D TV, 4K TV or other developments. Terrestrial Broadcast is complementary to Cable and Satellite and Internet. Internet is poor to scale for mass market HD viewing and more expensive than Broadcast for 20M HD viewers of same live content.
Or sack them. In the (Good Old [hah!]) days of the RA there were 100 field engineers in 6 centres. There are now 30 engineers for the whole country. There was a research department which was dismantled (more or less) completely. Then there was the Technical Advisory Group (which was, admittedly, staffed by industry) - I don't know whether that still exists...
Exactly, did you know they (Ofcom) don't even test home routers for power compliance, so when an isp states they have the most powerful wifi signal, well who knows that power its kicking out.
The only way to get a router tested is if it causes interference. (or mysteriously your cuppa never gets cold when its near the router!!)
The SNP has come up with plenty of IT related initiatives that have made bugger all sense or difference in their time in parliament.
Usual story. People in power can't know everything but they'll never admit to that, so they'll nod sagely whilst being dazzled by the latest shiny shiny and sign up to anything that sounds remotely buzzword-like. Preferably is should include the words 'digital', 'cyber', 'transformation' and 'channel shift".
Doesn't need to to work or be viable, that's for the next guy.
Seems strange that an SNP MP of all politicians would be against more data sharing considering his party's record on the matter.
Maybe he's their version of David Davis (when he took up civil liberties matters), his party can point to him and say "look, we've got him, we're nice really".
I've always felt that Ofcom pays the most heed to those who shout the loudest rather than take a balanced view from all opinions. In my opinion Ofcom should make itself more remote from big business and closer to consumer groups who represent those most affected by their decisions.
As a TV viewer, radio listener, radio amateur, marine radio licence holder I see few actions by Ofcom that are in my interests and many that are not but on the other hand these are generally in favour of business interests. Furthermore I get the feeling that Ofcom are actually frightened of some businesses.
Furthermore I get the feeling that Ofcom are actually frightened of some businesses.
Frightened is not the right word, its one of financial dependence for an individual. When you want to leave ofcom what are your options? Revolving Doors a plenty, between BT/Ofcom/Other Telecoms firms/Gov.
Should a regulator really be made up from/take key decisions from people previous running BT, have key jobs filled through secondments from BT, which is pretty much what happens at both ofcom/Competition and Markets Authority. Hence, the waving through of the BT/EE merger.
El Reg, seriously, quoting the SNP!? FFS you have now sunk to Guardian/Independent lows? [one's a failed paper, the other propped up by a Cayman Island based trust - just think about that for a minute]
3...2...1... down votes from all the commentards that followed the Guardian/Indy hacks over to the Reg. Bring back the old guard, as it's now "Not biting the hand that feeds political drivel"
Not downvoting - just curious - why do you think the Reg shouldn't be quoting politicians from the SNP? They're the third largest party in the Commons (specifically, 8% of MPs, with more MPs than all the smaller parties + independents put together).
If journalists want to praise the SNP's people and policies, or denounce them as batshit insane, then they should do so, but refusing to acknowledge their existence would just be odd.
The SNP absolutely need to be quoted as much as possible.
That way, when they say that things like the IPA could lead to trouble if an Authoritarian government got in, we can muse on what exactly they're going to do. After all, this is the party whose continued push for their main policy is an affront to democracy (and their own promises), who want to appoint State controllers / monitors for our kids and who centralise power closer to themselves with every move they make.
Presumably his idea of a rural broadband rollout was spending the budget on the M8 corridor between Edinburgh and Glasgow...
Pish, as we say in Scotland. It is not their main policy; that would be Independence. And the named person scheme is a formalising of good practice, where information known about a child is shared in their best interests with just one named individual. If it works properly, it can mean less data sharing of the trivial variety as professionals know who to speak to rather than ask around. Every time a Serious Case Review reports following a death, the constant refrain is that no one had the big picture about the child's life, lots of people knew a little but didn't know who to tell.
"leave us in a whole world of pain if an authoritarian government gets in to power".
The current Government is must be the most Authoritarian Government I've known, no question, specifically 'Zero-T' Theresa May. This seems to be message been driven down through lower civil servants too. The balance of Power is definitely with the State.
Feels more like living in a open Prison, of late.
I pass several new 24/7 (NSL applies when Smart Motorway signage is unlit) Hadecs 3 shoebox size Cameras on my route. These are lethal for head clipping minor indiscretions. The North Circular feels like been physically surpressed by blanket surveillance. I know of plenty of towns (rural/off the beaten track too) with ANPR Cameras on every road in and out for no apparent reason. They're not exactly crime central.
This isn't ramdom either, they are well thought out locations. Serious time and effort has been put into their locations, to act as trip wires. I don't see how these are compatible with the Human Rights Act, unless they are deactivated for at least part of the day, and they're not. Where is the mandate for all this surveillance, who's requesting it? the General Public really?
Britains' Open Prison / Authoritarian Government seems to have grown up out of People technical incompetence. It's almost as though, powers that be, are wasting no time in case a real tech savvy generation grows up with the ability to dismantle it.
Clipping heads/issuing fines for minor 'shoe lace undone' type offences. We'll all be virtually shackled by technology, based on some conforming stereotype box were all supposed to fit into (by demographic-race/schooling/credit score).
There seems to an acceptance by the technically stupid that all technology is good 'and must be there to protect us'. It ain't. Politicians seem absolutely clueless at protecting the General Public from unneccesary snooping.
There seems an increasing number of minor mistakes which result in Penalties/fines, which results in lots of time wasting to contest, where the democracy to contest such fines is skewed against working folk, due to time constraints/money.
like Saudi Arabia, you require specific documentation if you want to cross the Border to Escape from this mad house.
Not just SA. If a French citizen wants to leave France and live elsewhere they have to apply for a special government document giving them permission. They only get it when they prove they have paid all their taxes, and without it they can't transport their property (furniture etc.) out of the country.
ANPR on every exit in or out of a town would strike me as challengable. They've already been told to remove ANPR from a town in exactly those circumstances by the ICO because the blanket coverage was unlawful.
https://edri.org/edrigramnumber11-15uk-vehicle-recognition-system-ruled-illegal/
he needs to remember rural Scotland has the lowest population density of the UK and as such a very high cost of providing decent broadband to these isolated locations
But they want independence, so they'll have a good solution for that? We should recognise that the lack of Scottish rural broadband is of course nothing more than a Sassenach plot, and has been orchestrated from London.
Of course, from south of the border, I'm all for you having full independence. I'm sure the forthcoming Scottish National Socialist People's Democratic Eco-Republic will find a way of providing free rural broad band.
Government departments DO NOT want people with technical backgrounds who might ask intelligent questions...
When you said "Government" did you mean to include the Civil Service, because if you didn't then you should have! You might also have included "or provide intelligent answers".
The C/S certainly doesn't much like in - house technical experts; they are far too likely to come up with answers that are correct but that aren't in accordance with the current passing fad. An in - house expert is likely to provide a truthful answer in the full knowledge that it is less likely to come back and bite him (or her) later, and if any given scheme is given the go - ahead the in - house specialist is not going to recommend a solution that he (or she) knows he (or she) cannot make work.
The "consultant" is, of course, not restrained by the same discipline; for the in - house expert that discipline almost amounts to self - interest, whereas for the external agent self - interest might lead in an altogether different direction. Do a search on the "principal - agent problem".
As another commentard has mentioned somewhere in this thread Scotland is not the easiest place to provide broadband because of the small scattered communities; for similar reasons + the terrain radio - based solutions are equally difficult*. South of the border (not down Mexico Way!) County Councils have put money into broadband provision; I wonder if the devolved government in Edinburgh has done likewise, or is it waiting for somebody else to do that for them?
* As EE are likely to find when they try to replace TETRA.
My first and last email exchange with my MP via their parliamentary email address:
Me: You voted for the Investigatory Powers Bill, why can the Food Standards Agency view ICRs?
MP: Sorry, I can't answer that unless you provide your postal address
Me: But that's PII and your email system isn't deemed secure - it's says so on your email signature. Maybe you have public key I can use?
MP: ......
"Kerr concedes he does not have deep technical knowledge “but in the land of the blind, the one-eyed man is king, so in here I probably have more than most.”
Kerr needs to read a bit more.
In H.G. Wells' book "The Country of the blind", the sighted man is believed by the villagers to be suffering a mental problem caused by the strange organs in his head that seem to be affecting his brain, creating delusions; and they decide to remove his eyes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Country_of_the_Blind
I suspect that a similar scenario might occur at the HoP, where anyone that seems to express any knowledge is immediately treated with complete suspicion and not trusted until they fall into line.
"waved through because MPs are so clueless about technology."
House of Commons decided to filter email. Brilliant.
MPs no longer got email from constituents mentioning anything illegal.
Not brilliant if you are on a committee investigating rape or underage sex or domestic violence or....
Calum's dead right, of course. And it isn't just true for comms. MPs are somehow expected to know something about everything. But they are still only people. Nobody outside the tech industry has any more than a childlike understanding of how comms works -- how many people think a mobile phone sends a radio signal round the world to the bloke you're calling? Why should MPs be any different?
Which is why they are therefore prey to the plausible political weaselings of the major players' corporate affairs teams. Remember the Westminster Hall debate on Broadband earlier this year, when contributor after contributor volunteered how helpful the handy pre-debate one-to-one briefing by BT had been?
I don't see anyone here calling for a bloody overthrow of the government and their replacement by a time-served techie elite. So given we're stuck with the status quo, and given that the status quo is skewed in favour of incumbent lobbyists, maybe we should consider joining and funding non-incumbent lobbyists like FCS or UKCTA. If you don't like it, maybe you should be part of changing it?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
