AI Regulation Bill

Baroness Uddin Excerpts

Thursday 4th June 2026 Grand Committee

[Baroness Uddin (Non-Afl)]

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, for his persistent leadership in this debate. As the Government consider cross-sector AI regulation, I draw your Lordships’ attention to the work I have witnessed as a co-chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Digital Identity and a member of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Cyber Security and Business Resilience, which frequently fill committee rooms with UK experts and businesses highlighting the opportunities presented by AI and its profound implications for sovereignty, security, democratic accountability and workforce development.

The Government have chosen—perhaps unwisely, in my view—to favour cross-sector regulation rather than introducing a comprehensive AI framework, for which the noble Lord, Lord Holmes, and others have called. Coming as I do from a local government management background, fragmentation was often regarded as a source of inefficiency, inconsistency and risk. Yet AI systems now operate across our healthcare, finance, education and public services through outsourced and disparate technology providers. What assessment have Ministers made of its effectiveness? Has there been a cost-benefit analysis of these proposed, fragmented regulatory approaches?

Other jurisdictions are moving more decisively. The EU has the European Artificial Intelligence Act, with a common framework based on risk and accountability. Singapore has a national AI governance model that combines innovation with oversight, while, as has been said, the United States has been aligning AI development with national security and sovereign capability.

Against this backdrop, what assessment have the Government made of the UK’s position in the Sovereign AI Power Index, which was launched in the UK and which measures national capability across compute, data, talent, energy, research and governance? Do the Government regard strengthening sovereign AI capability as a strategic national priority? Do they consider the stewardship of strategically important data sets under UK sovereign control to be critical to national resilience and security, given the increasing role of global technology companies in managing public infrastructures and sensitive public sector data—including in the NHS and HMRC—in partnership with companies such as Apple, Google and Palantir? They may bring expertise and innovation, but what safeguards exist to ensure that the UK’s most valuable public data assets remain subject to British law and sovereignty, ultimately in the interests of British citizens? I look forward to the Minister’s reply.