Question follow-through · 2669
Artificial Intelligence: Intellectual Property
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, whether the provisions enabling AI Sandboxes in the Regulating for Growth Bill will include protections for UK Intellectual Property to ensure that it cannot be suspended to allow experimentation in re
About this written question
A written question asks a government minister for information in writing. Parliament publishes the question and any answer.
- Answering body
- Department for Business and Trade
- Tabled
- 19 May 2026
- Target answer date
- 21 May 2026
- Answer
- 27 May 2026 · 8 calendar days after tabling
Elapsed calendar days describe the record timeline, not whether Parliament considers an answer on time.
Votes on this topic
- Draft Code of Practice on Electronic and Workplace Ballots for Statutory Trade Union Ballots · 15 Jul 2026
- Draft Trade Unions (Permissible Means of Voting) and Employment Rights (Unfair Dismissal) (Amendment) Order 2026 · 15 Jul 2026
- Taxation (Energy and Vehicles) Bill Committee: New Clause 5 · 1 Jul 2026
These Commons divisions share a topic label. The question did not necessarily lead to a vote.
Recorded timeline
19 May 2026
Question tabled
To ask the Secretary of State for Business and Trade, whether the provisions enabling AI Sandboxes in the Regulating for Growth Bill will include protections for UK Intellectual Property to ensure that it cannot be suspended to allow experimentation in re
21 May 2026
Target answer date
Date supplied by the official written-questions record.
27 May 2026
Answer published
The AI Growth Lab, enabled through the Regulating for Growth Bill, will support the safe testing of AI-enabled products and services by allowing, in limited and controlled circumstances, temporary modifications to certain regulatory requirements that may ...
Official data retrieved 28 Sept 2026.
Later records
Possible follow-up questions
Strong links require the same MP, department and exact heading. Other same-department questions are shown as unreviewed candidates, not as confirmed follow-ups. No debate link is asserted unless a stable source relationship exists.
No later same-department questions indexed.
This is an absence in covered public data, not evidence that no follow-up occurred elsewhere.