Artificial Intelligence: Impact on Human Relationships and Society

Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts

Friday 5th June 2026 Lords Chamber

[The Lord Bishop of Oxford]

My Lords, it is a real pleasure to take part in the debate and particularly to follow the noble Lord, Lord Tarassenko, with his wisdom and great knowledge of the field.

Humanity stands at a real crossroads in the present moment. Artificial intelligence brings many potential benefits, as the most reverend Primate the Archbishop of Canterbury said, but also great jeopardy for the world. The Prophet Jeremiah invites the people of his generation facing crisis to:

“Stand at the crossroads, and look, and ask for the ancient paths, where the good way lies; and walk in it, and find rest for your souls”.


The primary risk of AI in the present moment is that the technology is being developed primarily for profit, financial gain and shareholder benefit—as the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, said—rather than for the benefit of humanity and our common home. Those commercial gains are mind-boggling for the few. But as profits rise, the very concept of what it means to be human is being reduced. Human beings shrink in dignity and glory to become simply consumers of goods or services—here to give our attention, money, brand loyalty and image—or else women and men, made in the image of God for life in all its fullness, are reduced to units of production, serving the algorithm and filling in the ever-diminishing gaps left by robots and AI.

Warehouses, call centres, transport, entry-level jobs in the professions and coding are all seeing vast reductions in the workforce in the aim of efficiency. We need a different kind of prophet now. What kind of future are we creating? Is it an empty utopia for some, based on entertainment that will not satisfy and what feels like slavery for others?

Nowhere is this dilemma seen more clearly than in the area of work. Elon Musk famously predicted in 2023, in dialogue with our then Prime Minister, that AI will put an end to jobs, as if that is a good thing. But work is not merely an instrument. As Pope Leo has argued, work

“expresses and enhances the dignity of our lives. It is a requirement of the human condition, a normal path toward maturity, development and personal fulfilment”.

Last year, in the diocese of Oxford, we invited 100 young people, mainly sixth-formers, into our clergy conference to listen to their concerns about the world in small groups. AI and tech were at the very top of their list for a variety of reasons, but the most common was what AI would do to the jobs and careers of these outstanding young people. Those fears have been underscored, as noble Lords have said, by Alan Milburn’s report on the rising number of young people not in education or employment, and by the cries of those submitting hundreds of applications and being turned down by AI in now dehumanised appointment processes. Our young people are more than data points, more than slaves to the algorithm and more than consumers. This kind of societal change is not inevitable. Technological change is not always progress. AI development needs the brake as well as the accelerator, as one of the founders of Anthropic said last night.

The UK can be, and needs to be, structured in such a way that there are meaningful pathways into good, creative employment and lifelong work as the foundation for human dignity, well-being and stable family life. We therefore need a much bigger, wider conversation on the societal impact of AI, drawing in the whole of our society. Governments need a richer, deeper understanding of what it means to be human, beyond creating a nation of consumers to a nation of citizens, drawing on the ancient paths of wisdom. That conversation will then be able to shape our economy for the benefit of families and society, not simply the profits of technology companies.

We need more investment, not less, in entry-level jobs, a rehumanising of the application and support process, more dialogues on the risks and dangers of working with algorithms, and some bigger thinking. A century ago, our nation responded to another new technology with the founding of the BBC—a radical step for the common good. We will need similar new institutions for the public benefit.

I sincerely hope for a response from the Minister to this debate which will demonstrate humility and acknowledge the crossroads, the jeopardy, and which will seek to broaden and deepen the conversations on the choices we must make.