Select committee: Defence Committee
Conclusion 14
Second Report - The Security of 5G
Published 8 Oct 2020
Paragraph 91
Addressed to Ministry of Defence
Defence Committee The Security of 5G All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
The Government has had to balance its own technical considerations with pressures from allies such as the United States. The UK’s closest allies, including the United States and Australia, originally embarked on a policy at odds to that of the UK. This had the potential to damage the UK’s close intelligence, security and defence relationship with them, although reassurances have been given by Ministers that this was not the case.
From: Defence Committee, Second Report - The Security of 5G (HC 201), paragraph 91, 8 October 2020
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 16 December 2020 (deadline 8 December 2020).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government agrees that the UK vendor market is not diverse enough and points to its diversification strategy and the Telecommunications (Security) Bill, while holding to a 2027 removal date for Huawei.
- On supply diversity, it agrees the UK market is "far from satisfactory" and cites a 5G Supply Chain Diversification Strategy, published on 30 November, with an "initial investment of £250 million".
- On the committee's call for the Telecoms Security Bill, it states the Telecommunications (Security) Bill was introduced to the House of Commons on 24 November 2020.
- On removing Huawei faster, it "recognises that there may be pressures" to do so before 2027, but says going "further and faster" would add "considerable further costs and delays".
- On compensation for operators, it says it expects "the cost of ensuring adequate security to be met by individual providers".