UK-India Technology Security Initiative

Ayoub Khan Excerpts

Tuesday 28th April 2026 Westminster Hall

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

The hon. Member is making a very persuasive argument for building relationships between two democratic nations. Does he agree that consideration of human rights must also be at the forefront? There are violations in Kashmir, so does he agree that the Government should intervene and ensure that international law is upheld?

[Dan Aldridge]

I thank the hon. Member for his question. We must take those considerations really seriously, and they are absolutely part of a wide-ranging conversation that we have with all our trading partners. We should be aiming for the best out of our relationships; we do not want a low bar.

This issue is not simply about what the UK can gain, but about recognising that our futures are increasingly interconnected and that we have to build new ways to navigate that. Our Government understand the potential and the scale of the opportunity, but its value has to filter out to the rest of the economy, to towns such as mine where trade with India might feel very far away from the daily concerns of the majority. We need to change that and build those relationships to show how much we can all gain from each other. Whether in clean energy, technology, education or trade, there is a real opportunity to build a partnership that supports both our economies while creating good jobs, stronger industries and deeper ties between our people. The question for us is not whether India will succeed; it is whether we choose to engage with that success in a meaningful, long-term and mutually beneficial way.

It is against that backdrop that the UK-India TSI matters so much. It sets out a bold new framework for how our two countries can work together on the defining technologies of our generation. That is not a vague statement of intent; it is an ambitious partnership covering telecoms, 5G infrastructure, AI, critical minerals, semiconductors, quantum computing, advanced materials and health and biotechnology. It is co-ordinated at the highest levels by the national security advisers of both countries and it is already delivering.

A year on from the launch of the TSI, both Governments reaffirmed their commitment to expand into new frontier domains. Private sector partnerships are multiplying, research collaborations are under way and investment is flowing. It is an important framework and forum for dialogue and diplomacy in key areas such as critical minerals, which are crucial to our economic and national security. That is particularly important right now, as China increases its global dominance of critical mineral production and refining capability, giving it enormous leverage over the global supply of those minerals.

How we build and strengthen our supply chains in an increasingly complicated and unpredictable world must be at the top of the Government’s agenda. Last week in the Business and Trade Committee we heard plea after plea from industry for a focus on diplomacy and dialogue to get Britain’s strategy on critical minerals right. The UK Government published their critical minerals strategy in November last year, aiming to increase global production while building resilient domestic and global supply networks. That is a much needed start, but for it to deliver, we need dedicated and sustained diplomacy to support our relationships with trusted international partners such as India, with both the resource base and political will to build resilient supply chains alongside us.

AI Safety

Ayoub Khan Excerpts

Wednesday 10th December 2025 Westminster Hall

[Ayoub Khan (Birmingham Perry Barr) (Ind)]

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Ms Butler. I thank the hon. Member for Dewsbury and Batley (Iqbal Mohamed) for securing this crucial debate.

Many aspects of democratic life are under immense pressure, but when we look at developments that threaten to dislodge society on a mass scale within a matter of years, there are few things that pose greater risks than artificial general intelligence. AI has undoubtedly presented us with opportunities for innovation and growth—so much so that the Government have pinned their hopes on AI to improve public services on a lower budget. But it has also played a role in creating an incredibly challenging environment, where information is no longer subject just to interpretation, but to direct and unfettered manipulation, where both the state and society risk becoming dependent on a technology that we cannot control or fully understand.

In their manifesto, Labour pledged to tackle the growing emergence of hybrid warfare, including cyber-attacks and misinformation campaigns that seek to subvert our democracy. That commitment only grows more timely and essential by the day, and yet we are falling ever further behind. Even at this stage of AI’s development, we are already seeing how it can distort reality at speed and on a scale far beyond anything we have seen before. This is not a theoretical problem. It is happening right now in real time around the world. And as time goes on, the practice of effectively determining what is real and fake will not only become a more central feature of our political reality, but will get increasingly difficult, with the consequences of making the wrong calls becoming ever more fatal.

What makes the AI revolution more dangerous is the powerful algorithms that amplify dangerous posts and trends.

What makes the AI revolution more dangerous is the power of algorithms to amplify dangerous posts and trends. On social media, where the rules reward provocation and engagement over truth, increasing use of advanced, unregulated AI only makes for a perfect storm. Increasingly, we see Governments, extremist groups and political networks deploying AI-driven bot networks to flood online spaces with co-ordinated narratives, drowning out facts in the process. These bots can mimic real people, fabricate grassroots movements and create the illusion of public consensus when there is none.

This phenomenon is widely known as astroturfing. When thousands of synthetic accounts amplify the same message, that message gains legitimacy, not because it is true but because it seems popular. AI-powered information operations are fast becoming the norm, not the exception, and they are increasingly proficient at replacing actual reality with a reality of their own making.

AI is not our enemy—it is a tool that is being developed and tested across our society—but unregulated AI that is unchecked, unaccountable and weaponised by those who seek to deceive is a threat to democratic stability. At this early stage in the adoption of AI, we have a unique opportunity to build the very guardrails that will protect our freedom of expression without undermining the integrity of our public discourse. If democracy is to remain strong, truth must remain strong. That is why we must confront the challenges of AI safety and AI-driven misinformation with urgency, because once trust is lost, our democracy will fail.