Digital and Technology Policy: National Sovereignty
Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts(1 week ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Bishop of Oxford (Valedictory Speech)
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 New markets and new jobs have no time to grow where existing ones are superseded so rapidly.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?
Data Centres: Energy and Water Consumption
Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts(1 year ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have (1) to measure, and (2) to regulate, the amount of (a) energy, and (b) water, consumed by data centres in the United Kingdom.
The Minister of State, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (Lord Vallance of Balham) (Lab)
The Government are actively monitoring the data centre sector and published the first government estimate of data centre capacity on 1 May, including measures indicating energy use. As part of the Government’s commitment to reduce the use of the public water supply by 20% by 2037-38, Defra is examining how the efficiency of water use in data centres can be improved and the Environment Agency is working to improve the understanding of water and resilience needs.
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
I thank the Minister for his Answer. As he is aware, the Government have a dedicated energy council, but there is, as yet, no similar provision for water, no formal record of all the current data centres or the water they use and no public criteria for assessing new proposals such as the one in Culham in Oxfordshire. Does the Minister agree that water demand and supply in AI growth zones is a pressing problem? Do the Government have any plans to establish an AI and water task force and will it have representation from local communities?
Lord Vallance of Balham (Lab)
The right reverend Prelate is right that water is a very large issue for data centres, as they consume large amounts of it. There are now technologies that reduce that use, such as recirculation of water. The AI growth zone proposals are required to set out water use—the volume of water required, the availability of that volume, the timeline of delivery and any wider infrastructure requirements or constraints—and they must work with the water provider to do that. Applications must confirm the above from the relevant water supplier and include any other associated impacts. A working group on sustainability has also been set up under the AI Energy Council.
Artificial Intelligence: Emissions
Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts(1 year, 3 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
To ask His Majesty’s Government what plans they have to measure the emissions associated with artificial intelligence in relation to the United Kingdom’s net zero target.
The Minister of State, Department for Science, Innovation and Technology (Lord Vallance of Balham) (Lab)
I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Oxford for the Question. The Climate Change Act, as noble Lords know, made the UK the first country to introduce legally binding long-term emissions reductions targets. This sets in law our commitment to reach net-zero emissions by 2050 and means that the Government must address emissions across the whole economy to reach our targets. This includes consideration of increased electricity demand from new and growing sectors, including AI, to ensure that we are compliant with our carbon budgets.
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
My Lords, I thank the Minister for his Answer. He will be aware—I was not, until I researched this—that, in Ireland, data centres now account for over 20% of electricity use and the largest data centres under construction consume as much energy potentially as 2 million households, according to some estimates. Does the Minister agree that there is a need for more joined-up thinking between the Government’s energy policy and the rising energy demands of AI and data centres? As a first step, are the Government ready to accept the recommendations of the Royal Academy of Engineering for mandatory reporting for data centres on energy consumption, water consumption, carbon emissions and e-waste recycling?
Lord Vallance of Balham (Lab)
Recent estimates from 2022 show that data centres, including those for AI, account for about 4% of UK electricity consumption. The recently formed AI Energy Council, which is co-chaired by the Secretaries of State for DSIT and DESNZ, is set up to do exactly what the right reverend Prelate is suggesting, which is to ensure that we have a joined-up approach between energy and AI.
Artificial Intelligence: Regulation
Lord Bishop of Oxford Excerpts(1 year, 5 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Vallance of Balham (Lab)
The noble Lord may find that not all rights holders have the same views, so I do not think it is possible to give the assurance he asked for, but I am very clear that we need a workable solution, and that means for creators as well as for access.
The Lord Bishop of Oxford
My Lords, according to the Government’s own recent survey, 43% of the public trust that the impact of AI will be positive, but 33% believe it will be negative. Given this very narrow gap and the critical importance of building trust in embracing new technologies, what specific steps are the Government planning to take to improve that public trust as they embed AI in the nation’s most trusted institutions, not least in the NHS?
Lord Vallance of Balham (Lab)
I thank the right reverend Prelate for that important question. Trust is key to all this, and it is why we are committed to maintaining high standards of data protection in whichever context the AI system is deployed. The right reverend Prelate is quite right to raise the question of the NHS, where already AI is being used to read scans, to improve performance in terms of missed appointments and to advance pathology services, many of which are narrow AI uses which are extremely important.