Virtua Team Talk

Although India is viewed as a huge potential growth market for smartphone and mobile devices recent concerns about national security are changing perceptions about the way such devices are used. In the last few days India has given Blackberry phone maker RIM a deadline of 31st August to give the government access to all of its services or face being shut down.

According to the Financial Times the country is also reported to be considering similar bans on Skype and Google services. In response to India’s concerns RIM has clarified the principles which underpin any request for access to data sent and received by Blackberry handsets but said it is unwilling to do ‘special deals’ for particular countries.

The issue is that India fears the device could be used by militants and insurgents in a repeat of the 2008 attack on Mumbai that left 166 people dead. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) was the first country to propose a block on the devices claiming they posed a “national security risk” because of their ability to send messages and e-mail without the governing authorities having the facility to monitor the communications. The row is the latest in a long running dispute between Research in Motion (RIM) and international governments.

It seems that the central issue is all about whether or not governments should be able to monitor the encrypted traffic from Blackberry devices and if so, how this could be done.

Although India is the latest country to enter the fray following the UAE’s lead, Lebanon, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait have also expressed similar concerns with analysts expecting more to follow suit.

RIM’s CEO, Michael Lazardis, defended BlackBerry’s position saying that India’s concerns risked undermining the growth of e-commerce and added “This is about the internet. Everything on the internet is encrypted and if they can’t deal with the internet, they should shut it off.” Mr. Lazaridis said that his devices were being unfairly singled out by foreign governments who were out to score political points and while he would not comment on the status of individual negotiations, be believed a mutually agreeable settlement could be reached.

Government officials in India said that if no solution between themselves and RIM was found, then they would ask mobile phone operators to block Blackberry’s messaging and e-mail until RIM provides access to data transmitted over the handset. Working in the mobile Telecoms arena I can fully understand both sides of the argument. Clearly national security is very important and having the facility to monitor terrorist activity is an enormous advantage for the security forces. Equally, it is reassuring to know that personal privacy is respected by the Telecoms industry rather than having to live in a ‘Big Brother’ society where all personal business can be closely monitored by the government should they wish to ‘spy’ on your activities.

Whilst there is no easy answer I believe that ‘compromise’ has to be the way forward. In an uncertain world there is ample justification for monitoring crime and terrorist activity but not at the expense of civil liberty. Maybe the issue is really about having the necessary regulations and facilities in place to enable access to sensitive data when it is fully justified but not in a way that is open to misuse. There are also some religious and cultural issues that need to be factored in.

Everyone will have their own view on the pros and cons of this. The debate over the privacy of communications and national governments wish or need to be able to monitor communications has been with us for some time. It was ever thus. It’s always been a challenge for governments, law makers and the privacy lobby to keep pace with technology. I wouldn’t presume to see a way through that debate, but It’s pretty clear that the law makers and privacy guardians need to continue to find a way; and to continue to adapt fast. Technology like evolution, just keeps progressing.

Health and Safety legislation is having a hard time at the  moment courtesy of the media. It seems that not a day goes past without someone having a jibe at a new directive that for many people seems unnecessary over-protection from a ‘nanny state’. Yes, it’s true that some of the regulations do seem a little ridiculous at first sight but anything that saves lives and avoids the potential for accidents before they happen is surely better than the alternative.

For me personally, Health and Safety is a serious matter and in my role as a manager I have a responsibility towards looking after the welfare of all my employees – but I have to confess that sometimes even I am shocked by new H&S revelations – particularly so when they are related to the new ‘politically correct’ movement! Take Punch and Judy for example…

I don’t know about you but as a child I was rather fond of watching a Punch and Judy show at the seaside as have generations of children. The script and the characters have remained largely unchanged for a hundred years and even with the advent of ipods, computer games and mobile phones children still love to laugh at the antics of Mr Punch fighting the crocodile for his sausages.

It now seems though that Punch and Judy’s days might be numbered – because in many people’s views the show is neither politically correct nor meeting health and safety standards! It was reported this week in the news that officials in a number of seaside resorts have decided that the time has come to rewrite the script and bring Punch and Judy into politically correct line.

Apparently, instead of violently wielding a club Punch will in future hold a fluffy mop. He will no longer be hitting Judy or insulting policemen and instead of throwing the baby away he will be tucking it up in bed. In short bad old Mr Punch has been ‘modernised’ and, like the rest of us, he will have to learn to be more socially integrated, politically correct and more health and safety conscious.

You might think this is a good thing or, if like me you have a sentimental nostalgia for these seemingly harmless childish pleasures, you might lament the demise of yet another great British tradition. Whatever your view however it seems to me that sometimes we need to get the balance right between making sure that our health and safety policies and our politically correct attitudes are sensible and relevant but also not too frivolous or bureaucratic.

Saving lives and having respect for other creeds and cultures is important for sure – but we must do this without losing sight of common sense. When wonderful old traditions that have entertained thousands of people for sometimes hundreds of years are suddenly changed to meet ‘modern’ standards I think we are in danger of losing part of our heritage and culture.

As Mr Punch might have said “That’s not the way to do it”