Select committee: Defence Committee
Recommendation 24
Second Report - The Security of 5G
Published 8 Oct 2020
Paragraph 131
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)
The Government has faced pressure to remove Huawei more quickly than by 2027. The evidence we have received would suggest that a quicker timescale could result in signal blackouts, delay the 5G rollout significantly and cost both operators and the economy greatly. For the time being we consider the plan for a removal by 2027 to be a sensible decision. Should pressure from allies for a speedier removal continue or should China’s threats and global position change so significantly to warrant it, the Government should, however, consider whether a removal by 2025 is feasible and economically viable. The Government should also be alert to the fact that other factors may warrant an earlier removal despite the risk of costs or delays.
From: Defence Committee, Second Report - The Security of 5G (HC 201), paragraph 131, 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".