Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

IT departments are the first line of defence for businesses

Please send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

Sunday 23 October 2016 19:50 BST
Comments
Hackers launched a large scale cyber attack on Friday night
Hackers launched a large scale cyber attack on Friday night

“With hackers on the loose we need to secure our online defences” (Editorial, 22 October). Whilst I applaud and wholeheartedly support your point on why we must all secure our devices and agree with you that the hubris from entities in handling these issues has a large part to play, I must correct you on the picture you paint about IT departments.

They don't all shrug and they don't all just say “switch it off and on again”. They are currently a lone voice in many organisations on this topic, often discounted as being alarmist (usually because the fix requires investment and no one really likes to invest in compliance type activity).

The perception that digital is cool but technologists are boring is one of the most dangerous cultural vulnerabilities we have in many organisations. The rift between the two needs mending and the need for speed to market needs to be balanced by ensuring we are selling goods that are delivered wisely and safely.

The technology departments in organisations are the first and second lines of defence on these issues and it is time they started being more confident in their profession and leaders need to engage with and listen to them.

Laura Dawson
Harpenden

Michael Gove needs to remember his own position during the Brexit campaign

Regarding Gove and his “experts”, does the arrogance and ignorance of this man know no bounds?

The man who was central to the downright lies peddled by the Brexit campaign, who gave his name and face to the “bile bus” with its £350m whopper.

This is a man whose only job of substance to date is that of a journalist who commentates on events. The man who in his blinding intellect states: “I think we have had enough of experts,” when opposed with facts that contradicted his aims to exit Europe.

Michael, remember your place. You lied to the public. Enough said.

John Sinclair
Pocklington

Stop undermining Brexiteers

Philip Hammond’s assertion that no one voted to make themselves poorer has received much comment. There are at least three rejoinders to it.

The first is that, yes they did. They believed in Brexit so much that they were prepared to accept the economic consequences. In past elections the Labour Party bemoaned the fact that some voters were untruthful on the doorstep about their voting intentions, because they were ashamed to admit that they preferred the prospect of tax cuts more than the possibility of better public services. In this case Brexiteers are to be applauded. Putting principle before pocket is surely admirable.

The second response is that people don’t deliberately vote against their economic interests. In the Brexit campaign they were seduced by the promise of cheaper food from the outside of Europe and the assurance of a massive injection of cash into the NHS. Given the level of misinformation put about by both sides, this also is understandable.

The third possibility is that they did it because they didn’t care. They considered their financial situation could not get much worse and are gambling that Brexit will improve things. If it has a detrimental economic impact on others in society, so what? Having borne the brunt of the austerity measures since 2008 and seen right through David Cameron’s contention that “we are all in this together”, why should they care if some of the affluent south also feel the pinch?

All these positions are understandable. My concern is what happens if Brexit doesn’t turn out to be the success for which we all hope. What if reducing immigration and giving Parliament sovereignty don’t turn out to be the promised panaceas? What if the economy does tank and as usual, the middle-class ride out the storm better than other areas of society? What if the EU turns out to have been just a convenient scapegoat behind which politicians hid to cover up their own inadequacies?

Theresa May herself dubbed the Conservatives the “Nasty Party”. If Brexit doesn’t deliver, I fear something much nastier. The Remain camp were so confident of success that they didn’t bother to plan for Brexit. I trust that the Conservative, Labour and Lib Dem parties don’t make the same mistake over the Brexit negotiations.

M Harris
Grimsby

Scotland cannot handle another referendum

In the 2014 referendum, the SNP failed to tear the UK apart but very successfully ripped Scotland in two. Relative against relative, friend against friend, co-worker against co-worker and neighbour against neighbour.

Nicola, in the pointless pursuit of your teenage dreams and with opinion polls against you, please don't put us through it again.

Martin Redfern
Edinburgh

I don’t trust Theresa May to handle the Brexit negotiations

Andrew Grice is quite right in one respect (The Independent 22 October): on the vital issue the Brexitieers want control of immigration into the UK and the Remainers (of which I am one) want access to the single market, which entails free movement of people or, put another way, accepts immigration into the UK. You can’t have it both ways.

Andrew then loses sight of land. On the one hand he asserts that “Brexit is going to happen” and, on the other hand, he says that the EU leaders are puzzled by what Ms May wants from Brexit: “No surprise”, he adds, “because she doesn’t know yet either”. Can you think of anything more reckless or foolish?

You go from a known position (which all are agreed could be improved) to an unknown position which could be disastrous or, because we are ignorant of its consequences, is inherently risky. This is not sour grapes on my part. All citizens in the UK should be previously aware of the true consequences of Brexit before Article 50 is triggered.

My final point concerns May’s own position. In the referendum she was a Remainer and has since become an avid Brexiteer, or perhaps she was always a closet-Brexiteer. So I regret that I do not have any trust in her to act in the best interests of the whole country.

Worse still, she has slipped into being the Prime Minister without any popular mandate from the electorate to hold this office, so her democratic credentials are totally lacking. All the more reason, both morally and legally, for Parliament as a whole vigorously to scrutinise the conduct of the Brexit bandwagon.

David Ashton
Shipbourne

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in