UK security and counter-terrorism minister Baroness Neville-Jones steps down after a year in the job. The former chairman of the British Joint Intelligence Committee is leaving at "her own request" in order to work in the private sector. The peer will retain a role liaising between government and business as special …
So who's the company?
Dettica (BAe infrastructure spying subsidary)
Fail as I don't consider bumping up £500m of UK taxpayers money spent on "Cyber security" (WTF that is) well spent.
You missed some of her other achievements
She also presided over this:
That had some very interesting effect on hiring policies in a lot of the companies involved already.
Aren't misisters meant to be banned from going straight from public office to business in the same sector?
Only a year on the job? sweet.
"leaving at "her own request" in order to work in the private sector."
So it's Jobs for the Girls then? Nice to see they have finally fitted a unisex revolving door.
With a Baroness following a Lord at that post?
It's hardly expected to be an patriotic idealist's meritocratic paradise.
Why on earth would being a politician qualify her for a lucrative job in the IT security sector?
She probably still uses the default password on her router, assuming that she even knows it has one.
...it just means that the customers, or so the directors believe, will come to companies "endorsed" by having a named VIP on the board.
Sorry but if I see some muppet MP on the board of a company I am interested in, I have to seriously ask myself if I really want to be involved with them!
So long tagline...
Nicely done :)
Bye,bye ..... and thanks for all the phish
"UK security and counter-terrorism minister Baroness Neville-Jones steps down after a year in the job. The former chairman of the British Joint Intelligence Committee is leaving at "her own request" in order to work in the private sector."
Is that a step down or a step up .... from being a national government minister to working in the private sector? Many people would have assumed that national government leadership is a role which cannot be trumped but it just appears to be a holding position at the expense of the public purse until something more lucrative comes along, and that would make being in government something of a non-event and nothing at all special. Indeed, it could be classified as a sub-prime business model which preys upon the electorate.
And that was a very pertinent/impertinent query raised by Whitter who posted Wednesday 11th May 2011 11:10 GMT .... "Aren't misisters meant to be banned from going straight from public office to business in the same sector?"
Could someone explain this to me?
Why are attacks against businesses the government's problem? Surely no intelligent goverment would have infrastructure critical to national security built, owned and operated by the lowest bidder?
So these attcks are the corporate issues. The corporations can pay to deal with them...or wait for the police. Federal government intervention seems like playing favourites. Do private citizens get such intervention?
Get thee behind me .. bitch!
worth saying again
Interesting read on this topic:
"Loving the Cyber Bomb? The Dangers of Threat Inflation in Cybersecurity Policy"
- Review Is it an iPad? Is it a MacBook Air? No, it's a Surface Pro 3
- Game Theory The agony and ecstasy of SteamOS: WHERE ARE MY GAMES?
- Hello, police, El Reg here. Are we a bunch of terrorists now?
- Kate Bush: Don't make me HAVE CONTACT with your iPHONE
- Worstall on Wednesday Wall Street woes: Oh noes, tech titans aren't using bankers