1 Lord McNally debates involving the Department for Business and Trade

AI Regulation Bill

Lord McNally Excerpts
Thursday 4th June 2026

(1 week ago)

Grand Committee
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord McNally Portrait Lord McNally (LD)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, my first duty is to thank the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, for that introduction. He and I are members of the Lords Communications and Digital Committee. We have both benefited from discussions and hearings about AI held by the Select Committee under the shrewd guidance of our chair, the noble Baroness, Lady Keeley.

Our briefings seemed to come from two directions. First, the tech sector sees the onward march to artificial intelligence to be a unique opportunity to achieve unprecedented leaps in productivity, problem-solving and efficiency—the very combination of which successive Governments have been seeking since the great financial crash of 2008. There are counterarguments, coming mainly from the creative industries and from people such as the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope, who see the risks and dangers associated with AI as enough to give us pause before we decide on the direction to take.

If the AI revolution is already on the way—I believe it is—our first task is to ensure that our machinery of government is fit for purpose. The noble Lord, Lord Holmes, suggested a cross-sector AI Bill. I would go further and establish a cross-party, pre-legislative scrutiny committee of both Houses to take evidence on the proposals in such a Bill. I was on the committee for the Communications Act 2003. It was one of the great experiences of my life, in exchanging and hearing ideas.

Something else that has been suggested is the setting up of a COBRA-type committee. I also served on COBRA in the past. AI calls for the kind of committee that is able to look forward, anticipate problems and advise on what we are doing.

These would be two useful first steps in making the AI revolution less painful and destructive to the lives of working people than other tech innovations have in the past.