Key Facts

• The new clause aims to establish a formal complaints procedure for acquirers.
• Acquirers can submit complaints regarding the procedures used during assessments under the Act.
• Regulations detailing the complaints process must be published within 3 months of the Bill becoming an Act.
• The amendment seeks to limit the flexibility of extending the assessment period to the conditions set out in subsection (9) and remove the need for the approval of the acquirer.
• Clause 23 sets an initial period of up to 15 weeks, with potential extensions beyond this timeframe if agreed between the Secretary of State and the acquirer.
• The Government’s impact assessment suggests a 18% increase in cases relative to the Enterprise Act 2002 regime but acknowledges a significant increase from 12 reviews in 20 years to nearly 2,000 under this new regime.
• Clause 23 sets out a standard initial assessment period of 30 working days.
• An additional period of up to 45 working days is available if needed.
• Extensions beyond the total 75 working days require written consent from the acquirer.
• The US process does not include voluntary extensions.
• Small businesses may see an annual report or judicial review as insufficient relief.
• Amendment 22 is a probing amendment aimed at greater clarity for SMEs.
• The amendment would require annual reports from the Secretary of State.
• It includes details on the aggregate amount of days added due to information notices.
• It covers the number of called-in events for which such days are included.
• The new BEIS investment security unit will handle decisions about issuing information notices and attendance notices.
• About 80% of transactions within the mandatory notification scope affect start-ups and SMEs.
• The amendment aims to ensure efficient and effective national security screening by adding quality metrics to reporting.
• Clause 24(4) ensures the assessment period clock stops while waiting for information or witness attendance.
• Clauses 19 and 20 require provided information to be relevant to assessing trigger events.
• Clause 61 does not preclude publishing additional information in annual reports.
• Clause 25 gives power to the Secretary of State to impose requirements through interim orders.
• Interim orders can be used to prevent completion of a trigger event or restrict access to sensitive intellectual property pending assessment outcomes.
• Final notifications clear a trigger event if no national security risk is found, while final orders address risks with necessary and proportionate measures.
• The Secretary of State must serve orders on all relevant parties as specified by clause 25.
• Orders must include reasons, trigger events, dates of force, and consequences of non-compliance.
• The Secretary of State can exclude sensitive information from orders for commercial or national security reasons.
• Clause 25 sets out requirements for interim orders.
• Clause 26(4) mandates that the Secretary of State must consider any representations made before making a final order.
• The MP seeks clarity on how 'consider' is defined and how failure to do so would be identified and reported.
• Amendment seeks to prevent Secretary of State from redacting notices based on commercial grounds if contrary to public interest.
• Clause requires publication of notices setting out details crucial for national security awareness.
• Sir Richard Dearlove testified that the Bill raises parliamentary and public awareness of national security threats.