Source · Select Committees · Foreign Affairs Committee
Recommendation 1
1
Not Addressed
If the Government is not more coordinated and able to think long-term in its approach...
Conclusion
If the Government is not more coordinated and able to think long-term in its approach to foreign investment, we risk losing our most innovative companies overseas, with harmful consequences for our national security. (Paragraph 13) Critique of the National Security and Investment Bill
Government response summary AI-generated
The government's response refers to a committee recommendation (not provided in the item) regarding the clarity of national security risks in legislation, which it rejects, stating it is deliberate not to define 'national security' to allow for rapid responses to evolving threats.
Summary of the government's response below — read the verbatim text to verify.
Government Response
Not Addressed
HM Government · verbatim extract
Not Addressed
Recommendation 1. We recommend that the new legislation should be as clear as possible about what may or may not constitute a national security risk in the context of foreign investment. Failure to provide greater clarity would be likely to have significant consequences for the credibility of the national security regime and for UK inward investment. As I explained at Report Stage, the Bill does not seek to define ‘national security’. That is deliberate as I believe it is right that the government of the day should be able to respond rapidly to technological, economic, geopolitical and any other changes which may affect our national security. The nature of the risks we face will continue to evolve over time and
Read the full response on Parliament ↗