AI: Human Extinction

Debate between Baroness Twycross and Viscount Camrose

Tuesday 15th September 2026 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

I presume that the noble Lord is referring to the amendment tabled to the Cyber Security and Resilience (Network and information Systems) Bill. One of the things that we have done is introduce the Bill and the guidance to work through that. I know that my noble friend Lady Lloyd will be happy to talk further with the noble Lord about this. One of the issues with a kill switch is that it would be impossible for Britain simply to turn AI off. Another issue is the extent of people’s concerns about whether a kill switch could or would work, but I know my noble friend Lady Lloyd would be delighted to speak further to the noble Lord.

[Viscount Camrose (Con)]

My Lords, I very much agree with the earlier question. When it comes to managing the existential end of AI risks, unilateral regulation is of very limited value, because the risk is of course global. Given this, what is the Government’s assessment of existing efforts to drive multilateral regulation, many of which, including the G20 that was mentioned earlier, have been trundling on for many years without a great deal of results. What more can the Government do and, in the absence of DSIT, which Ministry is in charge?

[Baroness Twycross (Lab)]

In the absence of DSIT, as the noble Lord said, we have embedded AI across government by having the very first AI Minister sitting at the Cabinet table. The Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade has responsibility for AI policy, including growth, innovation and infrastructure. The newly expanded Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport has responsibility for tech sector oversight, cyber security and online safety, and Minister Narayan sits across different departments. We cannot have our policy on AI sitting separately from all other policy areas; it is vital that we get this driven across all areas of government.