Category Archives: Hansard

My Lords, I declare my technology interests set out in the register. What steps are the Government are taking to promote the benefits of the Electronic Trade Documents Act, to both current exporters and exporters, and to get nations around the world to pass similar legislation so that the whole world can benefit from electronic trade documents? These cut the time it takes to trade from days to minutes, delivering economic, environmental and social benefits for all.

My Lords, I thank all noble Lords who have taken part in this short debate. I fear I might have got the noble Lord, Lord Fox, more on side if I talked about AI lawn-mowers, but perhaps that is for another evening. I thank the Minister for his response and for the offer of a meeting, which I am delighted to accept. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment 10 withdrawn.

Amendments 11 to 13 not moved.

Clause 2: Product requirements

My Lords, I shall speak also to Amendments 27, 34 to 37 and 40, also in my name. In a Bill that is completely absent of AI and silent on technology, how fortunate it is that we have a group of amendments dedicated almost exclusively to the subject of artificial intelligence. In measure of the hour, I will speak in depth only to three of the amendments, but the themes run through all of them—the sense of consumer protection through consumer awareness, and clarity for consumer, investor and innovator. Products are currently on the market that have been developed using AI, contain it and are controlled by it but with no ability for consumer or citizen to know that that is the case, nor is there any labelling or protection.

I shall speak particularly to Amendment 34, which would not in any sense cut across any of the Government’s plans for their AI journey and their potential AI Bill. It simply suggests that it would make sense that where AI is in a product, there is a label on that product to say that that is the case. Further, it says that a QR code should be deployed to give the consumer more detail on the power used in the AI in that product, and the energy and other natural resources used. It is simply a case of labelling a product so that consumers, citizens and all of us can be in the know that AI has been used.

On Amendments 36 and 37, I reserve the right to test the opinion of the House when we come to them next week. Amendment 36 is critical, as was demonstrated by the actions of musicians at the end of the Government’s consultation on IP and copyright. Musicians on Tuesday released a completely silent album to demonstrate the impact that AI is having and can have on music and all creative products. On tracks 1 and 2, there was complete silence, making the point that our creatives are currently having their works taken by AI with no remuneration, consent or respect.

This amendment would not offend the Government’s approach to AI. It does not even suggest changing anything from this Bill per se. It would just put a simple change into the Consumer Rights Act 2015. There is a wonderful symmetry. If you are a betting person, you would have to say that this is a good sign. My relevant amendment has been numbered 36, and it would amend Section 36 of that statute, simply to say that digital products created using AI would have to make it clear that this was the case—nothing more, nothing less, and certainly not cutting across anything that the Government may have in mind for AI. It is a simple approach, so that people can know whether, for example, music has been created solely using AI. The consumer—the citizen—can then know that and determine how or whether they want to interact with or purchase that product.

Amendment 37 goes to a critical question of inclusion. Currently, products can be brought on to the market which exclude small sections or huge sections of our community—not just disabled people but older people and people from different geographies and backgrounds, and who speak different languages. Currently, there is very little redress or ability to see how inclusive or accessible a product is. Amendment 37 simply asks the Government to launch a consultation to bring about an “inclusive by design” mark. What a great standard it would be for the UK to have an “inclusive by design” mark, physically or electronically, on every product in the UK market? If any product that is currently accessible is then made inaccessible through an upgrade or change, that would trigger immediate action and potential sanctions through regulations.

I will give one quick example. For years, card payment machines were accessible and able to be used independently by all members of the community; then, flat screen card payment machines came out, which are inaccessible and unusable for me and for huge swathes of our community. What redress has there been? Nothing. It would be on us to bring a case under equalities legislation. Why should it be the person on the wrong end of exclusion who has to suffer that and then to bring the case themselves? What a great thing this Government could do—through consultation and a national conversation—by bringing about an “inclusive by design” standard. I look forward to the Minister’s response. I beg to move.

My Lords, following the theme of benign attention from government to amendments that have washed up in this group, I shall speak to my Amendment 41. In doing so, I declare my technology interests as set out in the register, not least as it applies to Socially Recruited, an AI business.

There are many things that are not in the Bill, data centres being one of them; yet these are the factories and foundries that are going to fuel our fourth industrial revolution, which is already well under way. We might think back to all that Victorian factories legislation, all quite appropriate and proper, whereas all I am seeking here is not even a whole statute—which we could have on data centres alone—but merely one amendment, which I hope the Government can look benignly upon. It simply asks the Government to undertake a consultation to look at a new standard for the measurement of the power usage of data centres.

We are going to rely increasingly on data centres for almost everything that we do in this country. How we power them, where we site them, the inputs, the outputs, where the technology comes from—all of these are key features currently utterly unconsidered in any legislation or regulations. All that my Amendment 41 seeks to do is suggest that the Government launch a consultation, following the passage of the Bill, to look at the effectiveness of a,

“metrology standard for the power usage of data centres”,

and, not least, to reconsider the current power usage effectiveness—PUE—standard and whether it is up to the job in hand.

My Lords, I declare my technology interests set out in the register. What steps are the Government are taking to promote the benefits of the Electronic Trade Documents Act, to both current exporters and exporters, and to get nations around the world to pass similar legislation so that the whole world can benefit from electronic trade documents? These cut the time it takes to trade from days to minutes, delivering economic, environmental and social benefits for all.

My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow my noble friend Lord Arbuthnot and to have the opportunity to congratulate him again on being recognised as Parliamentarian of the Year for all the work that he did to represent the postmistresses and postmasters through that terrible period: one of the darkest periods in this country’s legal history.

I also congratulate and thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Newcastle for securing such an important debate. I declare my technology and financial services interests, not least as adviser to Ecospend and Trustly.

I will concentrate on connectivity, cash and community. Connectivity is the essence of being human: how we relate and how we connect with one another in real time, in the physical world. With bank branches retreating from our high streets, gaining financial services is becoming vanishingly impossible in the real world.

So, what is the solution for people who want to do their daily banking, not just for individuals but for micro and small businesses as well? The stats tell us that, whichever one chooses, you can be, in a certain percentage, a mile or three miles away from your nearest branch. But when one looks at other elements of connectivity, that is as good as being 300 miles away if you cannot get there.

I, too, will focus on the key role I believe the Post Office can play to bring forward solutions in this space. It is a brand that has been in our communities and our society for over half a millennium. There has to be a future for such a brand to deliver on the financial, digital inclusion and community cohesion challenges to connectivity.

What happens if people find themselves without a banking branch or easy access to a post office? We are told, “You can go online”. But what if you cannot? It might not be accessible or, indeed, you may not want to—and there are many reasons for that, not least the fact that we are in the midst of a fraud epidemic. The three largest economies on planet earth are, first, the United States of America, secondly, China, and thirdly, economic crime and fraud. Can the Minister say whether the Government understand why people may not choose to go online? What are they doing further to help people online and in particular, when they are in that online world, with something as personal and serious as finance?

I turn to connectivity. What happens if you have no bank branch, and the broadband and mobile coverage isn’t all that in your area? That is especially the case in rural communities, but there are also some city not-spots. You can be as financially savvy and digitally smart as you want, and you can have the best device, but with no broadband or mobile connectivity that payment will not be made. What is the Government’s plan to look at all these elements of connectivity, to enable everybody to have the financial and digital inclusion not only that they deserve and need but that is vital if the Government are to deliver on levelling up and their growth agenda? If the bank branch has gone and there is no bus and no broadband, it is difficult to see financial and digital inclusion.

A lot of good work has happened around access to cash. What is the Government’s medium-term commitment to enabling access to cash and to the very service that underpins cash and the ease of accessing it in communities across our country? Can the Minister say whether there is a continuing commitment to free access to cash at all ATMs across the country?

What is the Government’s plan for cash acceptance? To put it in terms: what currency does cash have if there is no place to spend it? As my noble friend Lord Arbuthnot said, cash is such a key underpinning for resilience, including financial resilience for individuals who do not want to go online or who want to run their household or business with cash for reasons of control. Similarly, for the broader economy, what is the Government’s view on the resilience of continuing the cash system, if and when things go wrong in the digital space?

Finally, what are the Government’s plans for further innovating around access to, and acceptance of, cash? I was fortunate to bring an amendment to the Bill that became the Financial Services Act 2021, which enabled cashback without the need for a purchase. What is the measure of its success? Most of the transactions that have occurred as a result of that service are for £20 and under, so it is really delivering financial inclusion.

The third “c” is the most important: community. Yes, we can build digital communities, and they can be incredibly effective, but ultimately it is important how and where we meet and come together, and how we relate in the physical space—the human world. Some may say “IRL”, but it is that community space where so much human potential—and economic, social and psychological good—can get done.

I have a quartet of final questions for the Minister. How many hubs should be established by the end of this year? I agree that we could be more ambitious. Will the Minister consider setting an ambitious target of 1,000 hubs by the end of this Parliament? It would take at least 2,000 hubs to properly cover the branches that have disappeared—and continue to disappear. What are the Government’s thoughts on increasing business banking services within these hubs? For people who run small and micro-businesses, this could be a lifeline. They do not have time to get into a vehicle and go five miles to another town, they want to run their businesses. What are the plans for increasing business banking facilities at the hubs?

While we are on the issue of financial inclusion, I ask the Minister: what are the Government’s views on flat-screen card payment devices? These are completely inaccessible for blind people and many other people. The worst thing about it is that it is taking away something which was previously accessible—the card payment machine, which had buttons on—and enabled independent payments. Now, because of that technological change, they are completely inaccessible. Will the Government consider looking at this and giving their view on whether this breaches equalities legislation?

Financial and digital inclusion often walk hand in hand. It is the Government’s role—it is all of our role—to play a part in bringing them about. The social, human and community possibilities that come as a result are what makes it worth being in a country such as the United Kingdom. I look forward to the Minister’s response. Ultimately, it is an issue for rural communities. It is an issue for all communities because, at its heart, finance is how we enable possibilities. That is the purpose: individual possibilities, business possibilities and community possibilities. I thank the right reverend Prelate again for giving us the opportunity to discuss these matters this evening.

My Lords, it is a pleasure to follow my noble friend Lord Arbuthnot and to have the opportunity to congratulate him again on being recognised as Parliamentarian of the Year for all the work that he did to represent the postmistresses and postmasters through that terrible period: one of the darkest periods in this country’s legal history.

I also congratulate and thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Newcastle for securing such an important debate. I declare my technology and financial services interests, not least as adviser to Ecospend and Trustly.

I will concentrate on connectivity, cash and community. Connectivity is the essence of being human: how we relate and how we connect with one another in real time, in the physical world. With bank branches retreating from our high streets, gaining financial services is becoming vanishingly impossible in the real world.

So, what is the solution for people who want to do their daily banking, not just for individuals but for micro and small businesses as well? The stats tell us that, whichever one chooses, you can be, in a certain percentage, a mile or three miles away from your nearest branch. But when one looks at other elements of connectivity, that is as good as being 300 miles away if you cannot get there.

I, too, will focus on the key role I believe the Post Office can play to bring forward solutions in this space. It is a brand that has been in our communities and our society for over half a millennium. There has to be a future for such a brand to deliver on the financial, digital inclusion and community cohesion challenges to connectivity.

What happens if people find themselves without a banking branch or easy access to a post office? We are told, “You can go online”. But what if you cannot? It might not be accessible or, indeed, you may not want to—and there are many reasons for that, not least the fact that we are in the midst of a fraud epidemic. The three largest economies on planet earth are, first, the United States of America, secondly, China, and thirdly, economic crime and fraud. Can the Minister say whether the Government understand why people may not choose to go online? What are they doing further to help people online and in particular, when they are in that online world, with something as personal and serious as finance?

I turn to connectivity. What happens if you have no bank branch, and the broadband and mobile coverage isn’t all that in your area? That is especially the case in rural communities, but there are also some city not-spots. You can be as financially savvy and digitally smart as you want, and you can have the best device, but with no broadband or mobile connectivity that payment will not be made. What is the Government’s plan to look at all these elements of connectivity, to enable everybody to have the financial and digital inclusion not only that they deserve and need but that is vital if the Government are to deliver on levelling up and their growth agenda? If the bank branch has gone and there is no bus and no broadband, it is difficult to see financial and digital inclusion.

A lot of good work has happened around access to cash. What is the Government’s medium-term commitment to enabling access to cash and to the very service that underpins cash and the ease of accessing it in communities across our country? Can the Minister say whether there is a continuing commitment to free access to cash at all ATMs across the country?

What is the Government’s plan for cash acceptance? To put it in terms: what currency does cash have if there is no place to spend it? As my noble friend Lord Arbuthnot said, cash is such a key underpinning for resilience, including financial resilience for individuals who do not want to go online or who want to run their household or business with cash for reasons of control. Similarly, for the broader economy, what is the Government’s view on the resilience of continuing the cash system, if and when things go wrong in the digital space?

Finally, what are the Government’s plans for further innovating around access to, and acceptance of, cash? I was fortunate to bring an amendment to the Bill that became the Financial Services Act 2021, which enabled cashback without the need for a purchase. What is the measure of its success? Most of the transactions that have occurred as a result of that service are for £20 and under, so it is really delivering financial inclusion.

The third “c” is the most important: community. Yes, we can build digital communities, and they can be incredibly effective, but ultimately it is important how and where we meet and come together, and how we relate in the physical space—the human world. Some may say “IRL”, but it is that community space where so much human potential—and economic, social and psychological good—can get done.

I have a quartet of final questions for the Minister. How many hubs should be established by the end of this year? I agree that we could be more ambitious. Will the Minister consider setting an ambitious target of 1,000 hubs by the end of this Parliament? It would take at least 2,000 hubs to properly cover the branches that have disappeared—and continue to disappear. What are the Government’s thoughts on increasing business banking services within these hubs? For people who run small and micro-businesses, this could be a lifeline. They do not have time to get into a vehicle and go five miles to another town, they want to run their businesses. What are the plans for increasing business banking facilities at the hubs?

While we are on the issue of financial inclusion, I ask the Minister: what are the Government’s views on flat-screen card payment devices? These are completely inaccessible for blind people and many other people. The worst thing about it is that it is taking away something which was previously accessible—the card payment machine, which had buttons on—and enabled independent payments. Now, because of that technological change, they are completely inaccessible. Will the Government consider looking at this and giving their view on whether this breaches equalities legislation?

Financial and digital inclusion often walk hand in hand. It is the Government’s role—it is all of our role—to play a part in bringing them about. The social, human and community possibilities that come as a result are what makes it worth being in a country such as the United Kingdom. I look forward to the Minister’s response. Ultimately, it is an issue for rural communities. It is an issue for all communities because, at its heart, finance is how we enable possibilities. That is the purpose: individual possibilities, business possibilities and community possibilities. I thank the right reverend Prelate again for giving us the opportunity to discuss these matters this evening.

To ask His Majesty’s Government, following the publication of the AI Opportunities Action Plan on 13 January, what plans they have to introduce legislation in 2025 for regulating artificial intelligence in areas including intellectual property, automated decision-making, and data labelling.

My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper and declare my technology interest as set out in the register.

My Lords, with the world talking AI in Paris this week and with parts of the EU AI Act already brought into force earlier this month, is it not over time for the Government to bring forward AI legislation in the UK: for the jobseeker who constantly finds herself not making the shortlist, not even knowing that AI is in the mix, or for the creative constantly finding her work stolen by AI with no consent, no remuneration and no respect? Does the Minister agree that sector-wide AI legislation, ushering in right-sized regulation, is good for investment, good for innovation, good for creatives, good for citizens and good for all our AI futures?