(3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I also want to thank and congratulate the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, on securing this question for short debate on such a pressing issue. I also want to thank ControlAI for its support. It is particularly encouraging that this issue has come to the Floor today, because it is the second debate on this matter that has taken place in your Lordships’ House within a month. I think that says a lot about the concern that is growing around this issue.
Serious harms from advanced AI systems have already begun to materialise. I read recently that Anthropic’s AI model was used to conduct a Chinese state-sponsored cyber attack, with 80% to 90% of tasks conducted autonomously by the AI system. As risks from advanced AI do not respect boundaries, this is a global challenge that requires co-ordinated solutions at international level. I am concerned that we are not doing enough to be risk aware, and that the Government are adopting a “wait and see” approach rather than leading on international arrangements. I hope the Minister will be able to set out a plan for international Governments to deal with the risks of superintelligence: that is, systems that would be capable of outsmarting experts, compromising our national security and upending international stability even more than it has been upended already.
I was heartened to note the Kuala Lumpur declaration on responsible AI, which called for international co-operation and a common regulatory framework. That happened through the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association. Sometimes we forget about the Commonwealth as a global organisation that can help to start these conversations. That would be a good place, particularly given our role in the Commonwealth, for us to start the conversation.
I think that global momentum is already here. Recently, 800 prominent figures and more than 100,000 members of civil society came together to sign a statement calling for a prohibition on superintelligence until there is scientific and public consensus. I hear what noble Lords have said today about the difficulties around that, but even the CEOs of leading AI companies have an appetite for this. The CEO of Google DeepMind, based here in the UK, said last week at Davos that he would support a halt in AI development if every other country and company agreed to do so.
Geoffrey Hinton said last week on “Newsnight” that there was a need for international regulation to stop AI being abused. He, like the noble Lord, Lord Hunt, pointed to the Geneva convention on the use of chemical weapons as a template for international action. Despite the fact that we are living through difficult geopolitical times, it is important that that does not stop us from starting the process of looking at these issues.
The UK can lead diplomatically in recognising a moratorium, with verifiable commitments from all major AI-developing nations. We have the convening power through the AI Safety Summit legacy, which was kicked off at Bletchley Park, and we have championed the world’s first network of AI security institutes. We cannot afford to be caught scrambling with retroactive fixes after disastrous strikes. We have seen that pattern before, most prominently now with social media, where we have waited until damage has already occurred. The UK can lead on establishing international agreements for safety, or we can wait.
I urge the Minister to formally acknowledge extinction risk from superintelligent AI as a national security priority and to lead on international efforts to prohibit superintelligence development.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords Chamber
Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)
We are focusing on implementation of the Online Safety Act: protecting children from harmful content, backing Ofcom as it goes through the children’s risk assessments of the platform operators, and ensuring that the duties that came in in July are effective. That is the priority for the time being. As I said, we are looking at the evidence and assessing what other measures may be needed. If we need to do so in due course, we will do so.
My Lords, I absolutely agree with the Minister’s point of view that everything needs to be evidence-based. But can I suggest to the Minister that, when she looks at social media harms to children, she also looks at AI chatbots, which can make harmful suggestions to children online? I believe the Government should take that very seriously, so I ask her to look at this harmful element, which is harming our young people.
Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)
The noble Baroness raises the importance of keeping up to speed with technological developments and looking at their potential impact. Many AI services are already regulated under the Online Safety Act, including chatbots, and so would fall under the purview of the current regime. If there is a risk of harm to users from illegal content, or content that is harmful to children, that would already fall under the regime and there will be duties that apply on it. The Secretary of State has confirmed to Parliament that she is looking to make sure that there are no gaps in the current legislation. She is also looking to make sure that Ofcom is using its existing powers to regulate those AI chatbots that currently fall within the regime.
(2 months, 1 week ago)
Lords Chamber
Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)
It is very important that there is connectivity across all the nations, and geographic coverage targets do include all nations. Many of the programmes in place to support the commercial rollout prioritise those rural areas, including for example in Scotland, Northern Ireland and across the devolved nations, so that all people can benefit from increased connectivity.
My Lords, I urge the Minister to look at the experience of Northern Ireland because, under the confidence and supply agreement signed with the then Conservative Government, Northern Ireland has the best connectivity anywhere in the United Kingdom. That has shown what an enabler it has been for young people and businesses right across Northern Ireland.
Baroness Lloyd of Effra (Lab)
That experience indeed shows that good connectivity can provide opportunities for young people to participate in the economy and society. It is our aspiration that all people should have those opportunities.
(10 months, 3 weeks ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I congratulate the noble Baroness, Lady Berger, on her excellent maiden speech, and I wish her well. I very much look forward to the remaining maiden speeches to come.
Ever since this Government were elected in July last year, we have been told that growth is their key marker for success. The Bill that we are debating today seems completely counterintuitive to that stated desire. Employees, of course, need to have rights in the workplace, and these have developed in a sensible and proportionate manner over the years, whether that be in connection with pay or conditions of employment. However, this Bill completely unsettles the balance required for competitiveness, growth and productivity on the one side and the rights of employees on the other. That can lead only to discontent and a lack of investment, and, inevitably, to a fall in growth and productivity, not an increase.
This Bill comes after hits have already been made to businesses across the country. The recent increase in the minimum wage is, on the face of it, a good thing. However, when taken with an increase in national insurance contributions at the same time, it is not hard to understand why many small firms are struggling.
Take one sector—the retail sector. Retail NI conducted a survey, published in February of this year, which established that 86% of those surveyed expect to cancel expansion plans following the increase in employer NI contributions and the rise in the minimum wage. It found that 74% of those surveyed were planning to reduce the number of employees and other staff following those announcements. These are significant figures that cannot be ignored or brushed aside.
The Government are certainly listening to the voices of trade unions, but are they balancing that in a responsible way by listening to the voice of job creators, both big and small? Speaking of the unions, small business owners are very concerned about how the Bill allows access by unions to workplaces, almost regardless of their size. As one small business in England said to me: “Typically, small businesses are run in the spirit of good teamwork, care for staff, with a drive and vision for the business to succeed. In a difficult trading environment small businesses could easily be overwhelmed by the legislative burden imposed by this Bill including the need to proactively engage with unions to comply with the law”. I hope that His Majesty’s Government will clarify that they are not intending to burden businesses with fewer than 250 staff with these proposals.
In the time left, I want to concentrate on one aspect of the Bill which I think is highly detrimental to growth and will need to be revisited by the Government: namely, the ability to gain full employment rights on day one of employment. That is definitely going to slow down business expansion and growing the workforce. I argue that it will impact on investment in research and development and innovation, as there is little incentive to innovate when the costs of growing the workforce are prohibitive. In a survey carried out nationally by the FSB on this, the largest issue was the worry of unfairly dismissed employees from day one: 75% of small business employers listed it as the number one concern, followed quickly by the removal of the current three-day waiting period, so that statutory sick pay will be payable at 74% from the first day of absence.
I quickly say that, in Northern Ireland, we have the added problem of a poor economic inactivity rate, currently at 26.6% of the workforce. If we cut the opportunities for more jobs, how can we deal with that issue, never mind the issue of the unemployed? The Government alone do not grow the economy, but they should facilitate the private sector to grow. To be competitive at home and internationally, we must give businesses the tools and the environment to grow, and I do not see that presently in this Bill. I look forward to the detailed examination of the Bill, where I hope we can deal with some of the issues raised.
(11 months ago)
Lords ChamberThe duty reimbursement scheme is an established scheme that businesses have been using to make successful claims since 30 June 2023. As I have said, comprehensive guidance is available on GOV.UK and businesses can contact HMRC if they need more information to support their claims.
My Lords, I refer to my interest as chair of InterTrade UK. Paragraph 47 of Safeguarding the Union says that the United Kingdom is not just a political union but an economic union. Given that, and bearing in mind what other noble Lords have said, how can we deal with the economic problems of tariffs coming from either the European Union or the United States of America? How do we make it simpler? The Minister said that it is an established scheme, but it has been in place for less than two years and has not had to be activated until these tariffs have come to fruition. We need to find a way to make it easier for companies and to deal with it proactively.
This is all predicated on the Windsor Framework, which removes unnecessary checks, paperwork and duties and fixes a lot of the problems for parcels and medicines applying across the whole of the UK. It also enables important democratic scrutiny through the Stormont brake. There are those protections in place, and we are continuing to look at the operation of the Windsor Framework as we go forward.
(1 year, 3 months ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I express my deepest sympathy to the family of the victims of this appalling case. In addition to the existing criminal laws, social media companies already have a duty to keep people safe from these abhorrent crimes on their platforms. The Government obviously share the noble Baroness’s commitment to keeping children safe. When the Online Safety Act is fully implemented, it will require user-to-user services to take steps to protect children from accessing that sort of harmful content. Ofcom will have robust enforcement powers to use against companies that fail to fulfil their duties, and responsibilities to introduce age-appropriate measures via the platforms. At the moment, our priority has to be to implement that Act so that those who use social media, particularly children, can feel safe. But, as I have said before at the Dispatch Box, we are keeping this under review in case any further legislation is required.
My Lords, I am sure the Minister is aware of the work of Jim Gamble, the founding CEO of CEOP. He has proposed an innovative five-point plan to deal with cases such as that mentioned by the noble Baroness, Lady Ritchie. Will the Minister consider meeting Mr Gamble to discuss his innovative five-point plan? Can she also tell the House about the investment made in classrooms to engender digital proficiency among our young people?
I am of course happy to meet the gentleman the noble Baroness mentioned. We are open to all suggestions about how we can improve this legislation. None of this is 100% secure—we absolutely know that—and we know that, as technology is moving forward, we need to move forward too. It seems that the criminals are always one step ahead of us, so we need to catch up and make sure that we take all the appropriate action we can with the new technology that is being used. The noble Baroness also made an important point about education. Ofcom already has an important media literacy strategy that it is rolling out, and that includes education in schools and with young people. But we all have a responsibility—every parent has a responsibility to say to their child, “What you see on your social media platform may not be what you think you’re seeing”. We need to make sure that they are made aware of those dangers.