(1 week, 2 days ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Tom Collins
I thank my hon. Friend for his remark. He is entirely right. In my own experience of engineering products, very critically, for safety, it was incumbent upon us to be fully open about everything we had done with those regulating and certifying our products for approval. We had numerous patents on our technology, which was new and emerging and had immense potential and value, yet we were utterly open with those notified bodies to ensure that our products were safe.
Similarly, I was fortunate enough to be able to convene industry to share the key safety insights that we were discovering early on to make sure that no mistake was ever repeated, and that the whole industry was able to innovate and develop in a safe way. I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Rugby (John Slinger) for his comments, and I strongly agree that there is no excuse for a lack of openness when it comes to safety.
How do we move forward? The first step is to start breaking down the problem. I have found it helpful to describe it in four broad categories, including hazards that apply to the individual simply through exposure. This would be content such as pornography, violence and images of or about abuse. And then there are hazards that apply to an individual by virtue of interaction, such as addictive user interfaces or personified GPTs. We cannot begin to comprehend the potential psychological harms that could come to human beings when we start to promote attachment with machines. There is no way we can have evidence to inform how safe or harmful that would be, but I suggest that all the knowledge that exists in the psychology and psychiatric communities would probably point to it being extremely risky and dangerous.
We have discussed recommendation algorithms at length. There are also societal harms that affect us collectively by exposure. These harms could be misinformation or echo chambers, for example. The echo chambers of opinion have now expanded to become echo chambers of reality in which people’s worldviews are increasingly being informed by what they see in those spaces, which are highly customised to their existing biases.
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
I have met constituents to understand their concerns and ambitions in relation to online safety legislation. There is a clear need to balance the protection of vulnerable users against serious online harms with the need to protect lawful speech as we pragmatically review and implement the Act.
My hon. Friend talks about equipping our younger people, in particular, with the skills to scrutinise what is real or fake. Does he agree that, although we have online safety within the national curriculum, we need to support our teachers to provide consistent teaching in schools across our country so that our children have the skills to think critically about online safety, in the same way as they do about road safety, relationships or consent? [Interruption.]
Before we continue, could I ask that everybody has their phone on silent, please?
Emily Darlington
I agree; my hon. Friend makes a very important point about the slander that happens online, the lack of basis in reality and the lack of ability to address it. If somebody posts something about someone else that is untrue, platforms will not take it down; they will say, “It doesn’t breach our terms and conditions.” Somebody could post that I am actually purple and have pink eyes. I would say, “I don’t want you to say that,” and the platform would say, “But there’s nothing offensive about it.” I would say, “But it’s not me.” The thing is that this is happening in much more offensive ways.
My hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton (Jim McMahon) made the point that what happens online is then repeated offline. We have even seen deaths when children try to replicate the challenges that they see being set online. With AI-generated material, those challenges often are not real. It is the equivalent of somebody trying to repeat magic tricks and dying as a result, which is quite worrying.
The Online Safety Act is not perfect; it needs to go further. The petitioner has made a really important point. The lack of proper definition around small but non-harmful sites versus small but harmful sites is very unclear, and it is really important that the Act provides some clarity on that.
We do not have enough protections for democracy. The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee, which I am a member of, produced a really important report on misinformation and how it led to the riots two summers ago. Misinformation was used as a rallying cry to create unrest across our country of a sort that we had not seen in a very long time. The response from the social media companies was variable; it went from kind of “meh” to really awful. The platforms say, “We don’t police our content. We’re just a platform.” That is naive in the extreme. Quite frankly, they are happy to make money off us, so they should also know that they have to protect us—their customers—just as any other company does, as my hon. Friend the Member for Oldham West, Chadderton and Royton said.
The radicalisation that is happening online is actually shifting the Overton window; we are seeing a more divided country. There is a fantastic book called “Man Up”—it is very academic, but it shows the rise of misogyny leading to the rise of every other form of extremism and how that links back to the online world. If this was all about Islam, this House would be outraged, but because it starts with misogyny, it goes down with a fizzle, and too often people in this House say, “This is all about free speech.” We know that misogyny is the first step on a ladder of radicalisation that leads people to violence—whether into violence against women or further into antisemitism, anti-Islam, anti-anybody who is not the same colour, or anti-anybody who is perceived not to be English from Norman times.
The algorithms provoke violent and shocking content, but they also shadow-ban really important content, such as information on women’s health. Platforms are happy to shadow-ban terms such as “endometriosis” and “tampon”—and God forbid that a tampon commercial should feature red liquid, rather than blue liquid. That content gets shadow-banned and is regularly taken down and taken out of the algorithms, yet the platforms say they can do nothing about people threatening to rape and harm. That is not true; they can, and they choose not to. The public agree that algorithms must be part of the solution; 78% of British parents want to see action on algorithms. My hon. Friends are right that the Online Safety Act and Ofcom could do that, yet they have not done so—they have yet to create transparency in algorithms, which was the Select Committee’s No. 1 recommendation.
[Sir John Hayes in the Chair]
Finally, I want to talk about a few other areas in which we need to move very quickly: deepfakes and AI nudifying apps. We have already seen an example of how deepfakes are being used in British democracy: a deepfake was made of the hon. Member for Mid Norfolk (George Freeman) saying that he is moving from the Conservatives to Reform. It is a very convincing three-minute video. Facebook still refuses to take it down because it does not breach its terms. This should be a warning to us all about how individuals, state actors and non-state actors can impact our local democracy by creating deepfakes of any one of us that we cannot get taken down.
Tom Hayes
We heard today from the MI6 chief, who talked about how Russia is seeking to “export chaos” into western democracies and said that the UK is one of the most targeted. Does my hon. Friend agree that we need online safety, because it is our national security too, and that as we face the rising threat from Putin and the Kremlin, we need as a country to be secure in the air, at sea, on land and in the digital space?
Emily Darlington
I absolutely agree with my hon. Friend. They seek to promote chaos and the destruction of British values, and we need to fight that and protect those values.
The AI nudifying apps, which did not even exist when the Online Safety Act came in, need a very fast response. We know that deepfakes and AI nudifying apps are being used overwhelmingly against classmates and colleagues. Think about how it destroys a 13-year-old girl to have a fake nude photo of her passed around. The abuse that we politicians and many others receive from fake and anonymous accounts needs to be addressed. Seventy-one per cent of British people consider this to be a problem, and we need to take action. AI chatbots are another thing that was not foreseen in the development of the Online Safety Act, and therefore it is far behind on them, too.
The Online Safety Act is in no way perfect, but it is a good step forward. We must learn the lessons of its implementation to go further and faster, and listen to British parents across the country who want the Government’s help to protect our children online—and we as a Government must also protect our democracy online.
(3 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Peter Fortune (Bromley and Biggin Hill) (Con)
I beg to move,
That this House has considered the future of local media.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, I think for the first time, Dr Allin-Khan. I will start by giving hon. Members some reassurance: I intend to give way every time someone asks, because I fully expect this to be one of the most intervened on speeches that I have ever given.
Tom Hayes
I look forward to collecting the prize. Does the hon. Member agree that local media is critical? In Bournemouth we have the Daily Echo, which dates back to 1900. With his grace, I give a shout-out to Toby Granville, James Johnson, Sarah Cartlidge, Benjamin Paessler, Alexander Smith, Erin Rhodes, Jess Skelton, Simran Mehan, Richard McLaughlin, Amy Woodward, Emma Joseph, Isabella Holliday and Will Frampton. If that were not enough, does the hon. Member agree that it is great that we also have new media starting in Bournemouth? Pier Journal launched in 2022 with Sammy Murphy and Laura Williams at the helm, and Bournemouth One launched last year. We need to see more new media.
Peter Fortune
Well played! That was very good, and of course I agree. I used to work with Toby Granville, so I know him well. I think that sets the tone for a lot of the interventions that will come during this speech.
Where was I? Line two: I fully expect this to be one of the most intervened on speeches that I have ever given. Why? Because all hon. Members present will wish to pop up to record their love for their local newspaper, be it the Watford Observer, The Oxford Times, the Farnham Herald—
(6 months, 2 weeks ago)
Westminster HallWestminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
Water is so important to Bournemouth, the coastal town that I represent. I commend Bournemouth swimming club and the 1.4 mile swim between Boscombe and Bournemouth piers, which is one of Europe’s largest charity swimming events.
We have swimming pools in Bournemouth, but only a few of them. Foremost among them is the Littledown centre’s 25-metre swimming pool, but schools tell me that they have limited opportunities for children to swim. If schools have few feasible places to go to, swimming opportunities are reduced. We can tackle child poverty, we can improve people’s life chances by, for example, resurrecting Sure Start and extending free school meals to families in receipt of universal credit, but we can also subsidise swimming lessons, provide free swimming passes, and invest in the swimming facilities that have been run down for so long. Leisure provision should be a statutory duty for local authorities, and we should have a Government—as we do with this Labour Government—who are committed to improving swimming for all.
(1 year, 2 months ago)
Commons Chamber
Tom Hayes (Bournemouth East) (Lab)
It is an honour to speak today as the first ever Labour MP for Bournemouth East, one of two Labour MPs for Bournemouth and one of many first-time Labour MPs in coastal seats won for the first time, working with our first Labour Government for 14 years. I am delighted to follow such fantastic maiden speeches by so many hon. Friends and colleagues from all parties and parts of our country. Listening to the speeches, it is clear that we have an amazing country with so many brilliant places to live, visit and work. However, regrettably, lamentably and unhappily, I must disagree with some of the wonderful maiden speeches, because Bournemouth alone is truly the best place in our country.
On the point of this debate, we have an outstanding variety of sports teams, including a premier league team, the Cherries. Moreover, we have Queen’s Park Ladies, who hit the headlines six months ago for winning a league dominated by boys’ teams without losing a single match. Many will rightly know and love Bournemouth for our sunshine, sandy beaches and sparkling sea, but what truly makes Bournemouth so special is our fantastic people. I am honoured to have spoken with so many of them on their doorsteps, in their community halls and in my surgeries, to listen to their stories and their hopes and to be entrusted with all they want for the future. I share their hopes and I will work tirelessly to help turn them into reality.
Working together, I am convinced that there is nothing Bournemouth cannot do and will not achieve. We are already the home of world-leading film, TV, music and video effects. If hon. Members are “Bridgerton” fans—why would they not be?—they will be able to see scenes made in Bournemouth by our video effects companies. We are also the home of outstanding healthcare training, with the Health Sciences University, Bournemouth University and Bournemouth and Poole College educating the nurses and doctors of the future. Our local college is opening a second simulated hospital ward to train school leavers and adults for vital careers in the health and care sectors. Many will know Bournemouth for our hospitality and our education sectors, but we are also an important finance hub and home to growing life sciences, digital and green sectors. Indeed, our development of Bournemouth’s ability to generate clean energy, store it and power so many of the things that we rely on is a passion of mine and many others in our town. Having spent 10 years in local government with a particular focus on driving forward decarbonisation, I bring strong experience of delivery and will fight to bring green investment to our town so that we thrive now and for decades to come.
The strength of our society is measured in its capacity to deal with shocks—we have seen plenty of those in recent years—but it is also measured in our ability to maintain our values. Caring equally for the health of all, regardless of income and background, is a fundamental expression of those values. When I was growing up in the late ’80s and early ’90s as a young carer to two disabled parents on low incomes, I learned that the first to suffer when our NHS is cut back are those with the greatest vulnerability and the smallest amount of money.
Equally, I saw that the people who flourish when the NHS is reformed and sustainably funded, as it was by the last Labour Government, are people like my parents. In good times and bad for our health service, I have seen what our NHS meant to my parents and the security it gave them, despite all the harsh blows that life dealt them. Healthcare is a marker of who we are, and I will play my part in supporting my local community to receive the care they deserve. I will play my part in supporting our carers to receive the investment and backing they need.
I feel blessed by my upbringing in Salford. I know that life is more than a zero-sum game in which what you gain, I lose. When teachers stayed late after the school day to give me the education I needed, they did not see my gain as their loss. When nurses and doctors went so many extra miles to care for my family, they did not regard my family’s gain as their loss. When family members and neighbours wrapped their arms around me and nourished and cared for me, they did not regard our gain as their loss. These kind, generous people gave so much of themselves because they wanted a young boy and his parents to have a better life. They believed, like me, that life is about enlarging the flourishing, the care and the love in our world, and that is why I am here in this place.
I have served as a councillor for 10 years, and as a domestic abuse and mental health charity chief executive for five years, and I am here today because I believe, like those who cared for me and those I learned from, that we must never lose hope and never lose sight of our ambition to make this country a fairer and more equal society. As William Blake wrote:
“Pity would be no more,
If we did not make somebody Poor”.
Poverty is a systemic issue that needs big solutions: houses need building, healthcare needs re-establishing, education needs resurrecting. This is how we will make Bournemouth and Britain better and fairer. These are my values. These are the values of Bournemouth. Our town can and will do amazing things for the enduring benefit of generations to come, and I pledge to stand alongside my neighbours in making Bournemouth better.
I have been in this House for only a short time, but already it is abundantly clear to me that this Parliament is made up of people with overflowingly strong values. One such person who served in this place with such values is my predecessor, Tobias Ellwood. Tobias was committed to the defence of our realm in difficult and unpredictable times. He heroically tried to save the life of PC Keith Palmer in the terror attack on our Parliament. I pay tribute to PC Keith Palmer’s heroism and to Tobias’s service. I wish him well for the future.
We all take our approach to service differently. My own approach is best summed up by a song that my late father loved. I will not try to sing it, but the lyrics are these:
“We can work it out
We can work it out
Life is very short
And there’s no time
For fussing and fighting, my friend.”
We have a country to put right. There is no time for dithering and delay. There is no time for theatre and drama. It is time to get on with things. In that spirit, I look forward to working together cross-party to shape the change that all of us will bring with this new Government and this new Parliament.
Finally, I will work tirelessly every day to ensure that everyone in Bournemouth East gets the very best, because that is what they deserve; it is what our town deserves. I dedicate this speech to my brother Joseph and my mother Diane, who are watching from home in Salford. I also dedicate it to the memory of my father, Richard Hayes, who I know is always with me. I owe them more than I could ever say.