Digital and Technology Policy: National Sovereignty Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Department for Science, Innovation & Technology

Digital and Technology Policy: National Sovereignty

Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts
Thursday 23rd July 2026

(6 days, 13 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Bishop of Oxford Portrait The Lord Bishop of Oxford (Valedictory Speech)
- View Speech - Hansard - -

My Lords, it is a real honour to take part in this debate, and I join others in thanking the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, for her penetrating analysis.

In the words of our new Prime Minister on the steps of Downing Street a few days ago:

“Britain needs to show the world that we can regain our stability once again”.


Stability is a deeply Christian virtue, as well as in many other world faiths. The psalms speak of God as a rock, our refuge and strength, and our very present help in times of trouble. The rule of Benedict, with his emphasis on stability and faithfulness, underpins many of our institutions, from schools, hospitals and universities to our great cathedrals.

In recent years, new technology has become one of the many factors at work in undermining our stability as a nation. There are many gains from technology, but as we know there are existential risks to mental health, our climate, cohesion, truth, relationships, community, patterns of work, the distribution of power—which affects every part of society—and the international order. The risks inherent in AI are, in part, a product of its accelerating speed of development. Many speak now, and the language has been properly used this afternoon, of a race to artificial general intelligence and frontier AI.

The speed of change and the significant power unleashed make this revolution distinct from other technical developments in the past, because there is a risk that the speed of change will itself undermine the very benefits that change brings. There is simply no time for public trust and confidence to grow, and we have heard of the growing public awareness of risk and the desire that something be done. Debate consistently lags behind the deployment of technology and public awareness. Institutions that give stability to society are undermined. New markets and new jobs have no time to grow where existing ones are superseded so rapidly. There is little time to build capacity in industry, local authorities and Governments internationally.

The acceleration we see at the moment is not inevitable but is almost entirely driven by commercial factors. The huge investment required to develop AI demands massive returns in a very short and contracting space of time. Every example of future scenario planning I have read identifies growing existential risk. We can identify the accelerators, but where are the brakes on AI development globally? Where are the constraints and the restraints for responsible AI which ensure that harms are mitigated, trust is built and benefits justly shared?

A responsible, balancing slowing down can and needs to come only from two sources. The first is the assertion of sovereignty by individual nations, and that assertion of sovereignty needs to be clear, ethically shaped and in the interests of our whole society. Sovereignty will always be a basket of different things—there are no absolutes—but sovereignty must be clearly expressed as a standard by which to measure each new development and each new investment, as others have clearly argued this afternoon. The United Kingdom does not yet have that clear standard and statement of intent. We need it urgently. What steps are the Government taking to make clear our position and our willingness to slow development to a manageable pace? The second source is the combined and collective power of nation states acting in concert. Again, the United Kingdom has a major role to play in drawing together a common approach. What steps are the Government taking to draw such a coalition together for the good of all?

I have been immensely grateful for the opportunity to serve in this house. From beginning to end, the experience has been a sharp learning curve. I have learned so much from colleagues in debate, including today, in APPGs and, in particular, in the Select Committee on AI and the Environment and Climate Change Committee. I am immensely grateful to the staff of the House, the doorkeepers and those who keep us safe. I record my thanks to my researcher, Simon Cross, and to Simon Stanley and Richard Chapman, of the Church of England’s parliamentary unit, for their expertise and wisdom.

The most important part of a building is its foundation. The most vital part of a boat in a storm is the keel, giving stability in the water. As the world navigates the transition to the age of artificial intelligence, we will need more than ever before the values and ethics of our common tradition, rooted in centuries of Christian faith and practice. AI can be a tool for the common good and a source of great benefit, but only if Governments remain sovereign. Does the Minister agree?