Joint committee on Human Rights

Debate between Alex Sobel and Peter Swallow

Thursday 15th October 2026 Westminster Hall

[Alex Sobel]

I thank my hon. Friend the Chair of the Science and Technology Committee. It has been my great privilege to twice hear Pope Leo address an audience in the Vatican. The second time, at the Jubilee of Governments, last year in June, he addressed this exact issue. This is not a recent development for the Pope. I read his encyclical and think that every Government should study it. It is interesting that—although he is technically a head of state, because the Vatican is a state—a faith leader such as the Pope has such an incisive view on an issue such as this and brings it back to the central principle that human rights are for humans. We have already seen the anthropocentric effects on the climate. We cannot have the same pervade every area of life through AI. These AI companies are now at a stage where they are trying to replace Governments and not be regulated by Governments. That is, exactly as my hon Friend says, because they can then limit their liabilities, maximise their profits and act without any scope from the state. That should concern us all.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

My hon. Friend will not have failed to clock the comments from the president of Microsoft this week that the UK is best placed to lead on AI governance. That is something that we found in our report, not least because of the AI Security Institute, which our report recommends strengthening further. Does he agree that it is not about limiting the very real benefits that AI may bring to the UK’s economy, our healthcare system or even, as we found in our report, to human rights, but about leading the world in realising those benefits safely while recognising and mitigating the very real risks that exist?

[Alex Sobel]

I absolutely agree. We continually heard evidence right across the industry, both here in the House and externally, about the excellent work that the AISI does. I am pleased that the AI Minister, who is here in the Chamber, has played another leading role in developing AISI as the world’s leading AI safety institute.

However, my hon. Friend is absolutely right. There are two things. The first, as the report found, is about human utilisation of AI tools through, for instance, deepfakes, which affect people’s human rights, or through employment practices, which we can probably very easily regulate, control and legislate for, but that need Government action.

Then, secondly, there are the frontier models. We need a very different level of regulation and legislation for those than we have for individual assistive tools. I am not really worried about ChatGPT 2.0. It is not going to create an existential crisis but, without regulation, future models that are being developed can and will.

Joint Committee on Human Rights

Debate between Alex Sobel and Peter Swallow

Monday 1st September 2025 Commons Chamber

[Alex Sobel]

I thank the hon. Member for his questions. I have worked with him, as he knows, on the APPG for international freedom of religion or belief. Religious belief is one of the reasons why we see transnational repression, and China is a particular example when it comes to subjecting citizens to it for their religious belief. We took evidence from a senior member of the Iranian diaspora, Mr Abedini, as part of the evidence, who was very nearly killed—not in the UK but in Turkey, which still is transnational repression because he was not in Iran. He was only saved because the gun jammed on the third shot when he was attacked. As I said, we know that Iran is increasing its attacks. Individual members—myself and the Chair, as the hon. Member referred to—work closely with many Iranian groups based here, in France and in other places. Much of our evidence was from those from the Iranian community.

[Peter Swallow (Bracknell) (Lab)]

I thank my fellow Committee member for representing our inquiry so well today and the Security Minister, who is in his place, for engaging with our inquiry. I recently hosted a meeting of the Bracknell Hong Kong community in my constituency. I was saddened but unfortunately not surprised to hear from them that some members of that community chose not to come to the meeting with their local MP because of their concerns about the political repercussions it may have for them and their families. That goes to show the chilling effect that transnational repression can have, not just on individuals when they are targeted by states but on whole communities. Does my hon. Friend agree, and is it not a central part of our report, that it cannot be right in our democratic system, in our democratic country, that any individual or community should ever feel they are not able to engage in that democracy? Fundamentally, that is at the heart of what makes our country so fantastic.

[Alex Sobel]

I thank my hon. Friend for his role in this inquiry and the great role he plays on the Committee. I will start by talking about the absolutely brilliant evidence we received from Chloe Cheung from Hong Kong, who is from Leeds. My hon. Friend the Member for Leeds South West and Morley (Mark Sewards), who represents her, was just here. She speaks to exactly that point. Because of her activities in Leeds—being visible, demonstrating, helping set up Hongkongers in Leeds—she had a million-dollar bounty put on her head at the age of 80. It is incumbent on us to ensure the safety of the Hong Kong community. One of the shortcomings we found in the evidence was the fact that Chloe was advised just to call 999 or 101 when she was threatened. She was even followed by two people who she suspects were either interested in the bounty or from the state authorities. We need to do much more to protect democracy activists and just ordinary Hongkongers who live here, going about their daily lives. I hope the Minister has heard that, and he will also have read our report and seen the evidence from Chloe. We look forward to the Met, West Yorkshire police and others in upscaling their support for people like Chloe.