...AND THEN THERE WERE MORE LIES...

A group of managers from the information technology industry are concerned that the FRA Act is going to discourage corporations from investing in Sweden given that all their activities will be wiretapped automatically by the government.

Sweden has, for a long time, earned a good reputation as an open and growth-oriented nation. This has contributed to making our country a desirable location for living and doing business. But the new FRA Act has raised concerns among many people and the way the government has responded to the reactions to the law is hardly reassuring. Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt talks about chilling and sees no reason for concern. However, there are good reasons to be concerned about what the FRA Act will lead to. Not just with regard to the consequences for the individual privacy of Swedish citizens, but at least as much pertaining to the consequences for an entire industry [which] put jeopardize Sweden's strong reputation as [offering] a high-skilled work force and good climate for information technology businesses. Swedish corporations are active in an increasingly globalized world and sell a larger and larger share of their services on the global market. Therefore, in order not to deteriorate Sweden's ability to compete [for those businesses] it is important to avoid special legislation in Sweden.

The FRA Act is a clear case of such special, unique legislation, they continue. Businesses and individuals in neighboring countries whose electronic communications run through Sweden (Finland and Norway more so than Russia) are concerned that the Swedish authorities will spill the beans on what they intercept from those countries. The consequence, they say, may be...

...that foreign telecom customers avoid Sweden and Swedish corporations for their communications needs. One example is TeliaSonera [the Swedish-Finnish telecom company] which, upon request from its Finnish customers have moved its internet and e-mail servers out of Sweden. Another example is Tre which is considering solutions that exclude Sweden in order to adhere to concerns from their Danish customers. A third example is the successful Swedish e-mail distributor Momail which is seriously considering moving its business from Sweden as a result of the law. The consequence will be lost jobs and investments for Sweden.

The FRA Act also incurs considerable costs on the Swedish telecom industry:

The operators shall according to the FRA Act cover all fixed and variable costs for sending all communications to FRA's so called 'conjunction nodes'.

It gets better:

The government wrote in its bill for the FRA Act that the effects for the industry is cost neutrality, by which they mean that everyone is hit by the costs. This is not correct. The [Swedish] telecom industry faces very strong competition internationally as well as nationally and now Swedish telecom companies are forced to carry costs that their European counterparts do not have to face.

The relatively large portion of fixed cost is also a disadvantage to smaller businesses.

There are also plenty of signs that Sweden is being questioned by information technology businesses:

Foreign corporations are [already] balking at future commitments to Sweden, and important businesses in telecom and data storage have to cope with weaker appeal on the international market; even Swedish IT corporations are considering a reduction of their operations within Sweden. Google is considering ceasing or shrinking its operations on the Swedish market.

Sweden's defense minister, Sten Tolgfors, responds to this:

Sten Tolgfors notes that the IT corporations that the managers are referring to, already have operations in countries that conduct wiretapping. The difference is that Sweden discusses the issue openly and passes laws that clearly regulate the eacesdropping, unlike, e.g., the U.S., China and a number of European countries, such as Germany and Britain.

It might be worth pointing out that Google has had numerous run-ins with the Chinese authorities and that the overall process in China is moving the country toward increased openness (albeit slowly). The U.S. eavesdropping program he is referring to was shut down by Congress in January when it automatically expired. It was also a program that specifically targeted persons suspected of contacts with foreign terrorists - it was not a blanket wiretapping program (which would violate the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution). Furthermore, a wiretapping program in Britain, more restrictive than the FRA Act, was recently declared in violation of Europe's human rights declaration.

Corporations cannot, as is being said, move in order to avoid wiretapping, as that is being done in other countries.

The difference is that in other countries the wiretapping is subject to "probable cause" restrictions and the citizens (as in the U.S.) have the opportunity to try the laws in an independent judiciary, ultimately a supreme constitutional court. None of this is the case in Sweden.

More lies from the Reinfeldt administration, in other words. Mr. Reinfeldt: once again, you're in a hole - it's time to quit digging!