Telecommunications (Security) Bill — New Clause 1 — OFCOM’s Annual Report — Security — 25 May 2021 at 16:30

The majority of MPs voted not to require OFCOM's annual report to cover the security of the telecommunications network.

MPs were considering the Telecommunications (Security) Bill[1][2][3]

The proposed new clause rejected in this vote was titled: OFCOM’s Annual Report and stated:

  • (1) The Communications Act 2003 is amended as follows.
  • (2) After section 105Z29 insert—
  • “105Z30 OFCOM’s Annual Report
  • (1) Every report under paragraph 12 of the Schedule to the Office of Communications Act 2002 (OFCOM’s annual report) must include a statement on—
  • (a) the adequacy of OFCOM’s resourcing in fulfilling its functions under the amendments made to this Act by the Telecommunications (Security) Act 2021;
  • (b) OFCOM’s determination of the adequacy of measures taken by network providers in the previous 12 months to comply with sections 105A and 105B of the Communications Act 2003 and regulations made thereunder; and
  • (c) OFCOM’s assessment of emerging or future areas of security risk based on its interrogation of network providers’ asset registries.
  • (2) The statement required by subsection (1)(a) must include an assessment of—
  • (a) the adequacy of Ofcom’s budget and funding;
  • (b) the adequacy of staffing levels in Ofcom;
  • (c) any skills shortages faced by Ofcom.”

The rejected amendment was accompanied by the following explanatory statement from its proposer:

  • This new clause introduces an obligation on Ofcom to report on the adequacy of their resources and assess the adequacy of the annual measures taken by telecommunications providers to comply with their duty to take necessary security measures. It also requires Ofcom to assess future areas of security risk based on its interrogation of network providers’ asset registries.

The Telecommunications (Security) Bill introduced: "a new security framework for the UK telecoms sector to ensure that public telecommunications providers operate secure and resilient networks and services and manage their supply chains appropriately."[3]


Debate in Parliament |

Public Whip is run as a free not-for-profit service. If you'd like to support us, please consider switching your (UK) electricity and/or gas to Octopus Energy or tip us via Ko-Fi.

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What are Boths? An MP can vote both aye and no in the same division. The boths page explains this.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (No)Minority (Aye)BothTurnout
Alba0 20100.0%
Alliance0 10100.0%
Con356 (+2 tell) 0098.4%
DUP8 00100.0%
Green0 10100.0%
Independent1 40100.0%
Lab0 194 (+2 tell)099.0%
LDem0 110100.0%
PC0 30100.0%
SDLP0 20100.0%
SNP0 450100.0%
Total:365 263098.8%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

MPs for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible MP who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Constituency | Party | Vote

no rebellions

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

The Whip on the Web

Help keep PublicWhip alive