Social Media: Non-consensual Sexual Deepfakes
Charlotte Nichols Excerpts(3 weeks, 2 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Liz Kendall
Non-consensual intimate images of women bloodied and bruised, women in bikinis and child sexual abuse are not freedom of speech—they are abuse.
Charlotte Nichols (Warrington North) (Lab)
While X as a platform, and indeed some parties in this place, seem content to profit from the proliferation of illegal sexually abusive content, this Government are meant to practise what we preach on online safety and violence against women and girls. The public, like me, are baffled by hearing tough words from a Government who continue to not just use but prioritise X for their communications. If non-consensual deepfake pornography and child sex abuse imagery is not the red line for the Government to take their communications elsewhere, I ask the Secretary of State, what is?
Liz Kendall
My hon. Friend and I discussed this matter just last week. I completely agree with her that we need to get our views and voices out on a whole range of other platforms. I and many Ministers make that point regularly, and I think there is much more that we could do. We will keep the issue under review. As I spelled out in my statement, there is an argument, which the director general of the BBC made, about keeping a voice on a platform that is used by so many people, but I understand her concerns and we will keep this under review.
Digital ID
Charlotte Nichols Excerpts(3 months, 3 weeks ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Charlotte Nichols (Warrington North) (Lab)
I have been contacted by a large number of constituents in recent weeks, whose healthy scepticism about digital ID making a material difference in tackling illegal immigration I share. I think there is scope for better digital integration across the public sector more generally, but the Secretary of State talked in her statement about a lot of hypothetical things—things that this policy could do in the future—and the only use case that has been confirmed so far is right-to-work checks. Can we be clear on the use cases that we intend to pursue and over which timescales, so that we have the information we need to make a decision on whether we want to go down this path?
Liz Kendall
These are not hypotheticals; we are looking at how other countries have used these systems to deliver more effective Government and other services to their citizens. We have proposed having mandatory right-to-work checks by the end of the Parliament, but there will be many important voluntary ways in which people can better access services and support. We will be consulting on that fully when we come forward with the detailed proposals.