Select committee: Defence Committee
Recommendation 22
Second Report - The Security of 5G
Published 8 Oct 2020
Paragraph 121
Addressed to Ministry of Defence
Defence Committee The Security of 5G All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Recommendation (the committee's words)
We recognise that a D10 alliance could become more than just an alliance to provide alternatives to Chinese technology. For security reasons beyond the remit of this inquiry we recommend that the Government takes steps to engage a D10 alliance of the most complete kind. For security reasons beyond the remit of this inquiry we recommend that the Government takes steps to engage a D10 alliance of the most complete kind.
From: Defence Committee, Second Report - The Security of 5G (HC 201), paragraph 121, 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".