Reading the bill’s publication files and writing a plain-English Green Book note…
Reading the bill’s publication files and writing a plain-English Green Book note…
Proposal 4140
A Bill to make provision for the designation of bodies involved in foreign power threat activity; to create offences relating to bodies designated under this Act; and for connected purposes.
Appraisal prepared 7 Sept 2026, 19:23. Next scheduled update 8 Sept 2026, 19:23.
Sponsor: Home Office
Open publications on bills.parliament.ukPlain-English note and Green Book five-case reading from the official papers — the heart of this page.
In plain English
The Act lets the Home Secretary formally list (designate) organisations that are involved in hostile activity linked to a foreign state, such as espionage, sabotage or interference in UK democracy. Once a body is designated, it becomes a criminal offence to support it for purposes harmful to UK safety or interests, to materially assist its UK‑related activities, or to take material benefits from it, except in narrow, defined situations. The Act plugs these new powers into the existing National Security Act 2023, using a system similar to the way terrorist groups can be proscribed under the Terrorism Act 2000. It also creates a process to apply for removal from the list and to appeal refusals to a specialist tribunal that already deals with terrorism proscriptions.
Bodies that act on behalf of, or to benefit, foreign powers in hostile ways are directly affected, because they can be designated and criminal penalties then apply to those who work with or support them. Individuals and organisations in the UK, and UK persons abroad, could be prosecuted if they knowingly give support, assistance, or material benefits to a designated body for purposes prejudicial to the UK’s safety or interests. Public bodies, lawyers, and humanitarian organisations are indirectly affected, because the Act sets out specific defences and exceptions for lawful public functions, legal work, and humanitarian activities that meet recognised international principles. The security and intelligence agencies, police, and the Home Office are affected operationally, as they gain a new tool to deter, disrupt and prosecute state‑linked threat activity.
Now that it has become law, there is a clear legal route for the Home Secretary to name organisations as ‘designated bodies’ if they are believed to be involved in foreign power threat activity and listing them is seen as necessary to protect the UK. Supporting such a designated body in meetings or public statements for harmful purposes, materially assisting its UK‑related work, or taking significant benefits from it can now carry prison sentences of up to 14 years and/or a fine. Certain existing National Security Act 2023 offences and sentencing rules are tightened by adding a ‘designated body condition’, so acting for or benefiting a designated body can aggravate penalties in a similar way to acting for a foreign power. Designated bodies, or others affected, can now apply for removal from the list and appeal a refusal to the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, using procedures modelled on terrorism proscriptions.
Same bill, simpler words — a deeper read without the jargon.
Some foreign governments secretly use groups or companies to spy on the UK, spread lies, or damage important places. This law lets the Home Secretary put those groups on an official ‘danger list’ if there is a good reason to believe they are doing that. Once on the list, it can be a serious crime to help them, speak in support of them for bad reasons, or take money or other big benefits from them, unless you are doing proper legal work, official work, or genuine life‑saving help. The law also gives a way for a group to ask to come off the list, and a special court can check if the government has made a mistake.
Green Book 2026 · 5 Case Model
The Act responds to what the Government describes as persistent and growing threats from foreign states, including espionage, foreign political interference, sabotage, disinformation, cyber‑operations and even assassinations. The National Security Act 2023 created modern tools against state threats, but an independent review concluded that terrorism‑style proscription powers did not fit state‑linked entities and recommended a tailored ‘state threats proscription‑style’ power. This Act aims to fill that gap by allowing designation of hostile state‑linked bodies and new criminal offences around supporting or assisting them.
The Act explicitly builds on and amends the National Security Act 2023, aligning with the existing strategy of giving law enforcement and intelligence agencies modern powers to deter, detect and disrupt state threats. It mirrors structures in terrorism law, particularly the Terrorism Act 2000 proscription regime and use of the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, while remaining distinct from financial sanctions under the Sanctions and Anti‑Money Laundering Act 2018 so both systems can run in parallel.
Accountability · outcome beside Green Book evidence
National Security (State Threats) Act 2026 became law. The official papers we read covered most of the Green Book five cases with concrete detail. That does not prove the outcome was “right” — it means the case on paper was relatively complete for accountability scrutiny.
Strategic: The Act responds to what the Government describes as persistent and growing threats from foreign states, including espionage, foreign political interference, sabotage, disinformation, cyber‑operations and even assassinations. The National Security Act 2023 created modern tools against state threats, but an independent review concluded that terrorism‑style proscription powers did not fit state‑linked entities and recommended a tailored ‘state threats proscription‑style’ power. This Act aims to fill that gap by allowing designation of hostile state‑linked bodies and new criminal offences around supporting or assisting them.
Economic: The Explanatory Notes state that any additional public sector costs (for example to policing, the courts or prisons) are expected to be small enough to be absorbed within existing budgets, and do not provide a quantified overall cost, benefit, or net present value for the Act. No separate impact assessment, EANDCB figure or monetised benefit estimate for this specific Act is included in the supplied documents, so the financial effects are only described in broad, qualitative terms.
Commercial: Delivery rests mainly with public authorities rather than commercial contractors: the Home Secretary designates bodies by regulations, while law enforcement, intelligence agencies, prosecutors and the courts enforce the new offences and manage cases. There is no reference in the documents to outsourcing or procurement of major new services specific to this regime.
Financial: The Explanatory Notes state that any extra public spending from this Act, such as on law enforcement, courts or prisons, is expected to be met from within existing departmental budgets rather than from a new dedicated funding stream. Parliamentary approval for any associated public expenditure and charges is to be sought through the usual Supply and financial procedures mentioned in the Notes.
Management: The Home Secretary is responsible for designating and de‑designating bodies by regulations, maintaining the schedule of designated bodies, and setting procedural rules for de‑designation applications. The Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission, created under the Terrorism Act 2000, hears appeals against refusals to remove a designation or an alternative name, while the criminal justice system (police, CPS, courts and prisons) manages investigation, prosecution, sentencing and detention under the new offences.
This is an accountability reading, not a recommendation and not a score. It does not say whether Parliament should have passed or rejected the bill. It only sets the actual parliamentary outcome beside how complete the Green Book five-case evidence was in the official papers.
These UK Acts sit in a similar policy space and are already law. Pairing uses this proposal’s official papers (and the plain-English note themes). It is not a verdict that the proposal is redundant or unnecessary.
UK Act · Royal Assent · 2024-08-19
National Security Act 2023
Same policy area (“Defence”) with overlapping title wording. Matched using wording from this bill’s official papersAlready law — useful context when asking whether this bill adds something new or mainly revisits covered ground.
UK Act · Royal Assent · 2024-03-20
National Security and Investment Act 2021
Same policy area (“Defence”) with overlapping title wording. Matched using wording from this bill’s official papersAlready law — useful context when asking whether this bill adds something new or mainly revisits covered ground.
UK Act · Royal Assent · 2014-05-20
Defence Reform Act
Nearby policy wording to this bill. Matched using wording from this bill’s official papersAlready law — context only, not a verdict on whether the new bill is needed.