Tag: Speeches

  • Michael Ellis – 2021 Statement on the Standard for Algorithmic Transparency

    Michael Ellis – 2021 Statement on the Standard for Algorithmic Transparency

    The statement made by Michael Ellis, the Paymaster General, in the House of Commons on 29 November 2021.

    My noble Friend the Minister for Efficiency and Transformation (Lord Agnew Kt) has today made the following written statement:

    The Cabinet Office’s Central Digital and Data Office (CDDO) has today published a cross-Government standard for algorithmic transparency. This move makes the UK one of the first countries in the world to make progress on developing a national algorithmic transparency standard. The CDDO was established in January 2021 as the new strategic centre for digital, data and technology for the Government.

    Several leading organisations in the field, such as the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation (CDEI), Ada Lovelace Institute and Alan Turing Institute, as well as renowned academic and international institutions, including the Oxford Internet Institute, AI Now Institute and OECD, have called for greater transparency to help manage the risks associated with algorithmic decision making, bring scrutiny to the role of algorithms in decision-making processes and help build public trust.

    In the National Data Strategy, the Government committed to working with leading organisations in the field to explore what an effective mechanism to deliver greater algorithmic transparency would look like. It reiterated this commitment in the response to the National Data Strategy consultation, and announced that it was developing a public sector algorithmic transparency standard in the National AI Strategy.

    While designing the first version of the standard, CDDO has worked closely with the CDEI. It has convened stakeholders from across Government, civil society and academia, and conducted a deliberative public engagement exercise with the CDEI and BritainThinks, to ensure that a diverse range of views have been taken into account.

    Proactive transparency in this field is a natural extension of the UK’s long-standing leadership in data ethics and open data. Several public sector organisations will trial the standard in the coming months, and provide user feedback to CDDO. CDDO is also seeking further feedback from stakeholders outside of Government. Following the pilot, CDDO will iterate the standard based on feedback gathered and seek formal approval from the Data Standards Authority in 2022.

    This development comes after the Government have consulted on a proposal to introduce transparency reporting on the use of algorithms in decision making for public authorities, Government Departments and Government contractors, as part of the wide-ranging consultation on the future of the UK’s data protection regime. It sought views on the role that such reporting would play in building public trust, as well as what the key contents of mandatory transparency reporting should be and whether any exemptions should apply.

    I have deposited a copy of the standard and accompanying guidance in the Libraries of both Houses, and published both on www.gov.uk.

  • George Freeman – 2021 Statement on Horizon Europe

    George Freeman – 2021 Statement on Horizon Europe

    The statement made by George Freeman, the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, in the House of Commons on 29 November 2021.

    The Government are announcing today a guarantee to provide a financial safety net for successful UK applicants to Horizon Europe, while we push to formalise our association as soon as possible.

    We agreed terms for association under the EU-UK Trade and Co-operation Agreement. When the TCA was agreed in December 2020, the UK and EU signed a joint declaration on participation in union programmes and access to programme services. This sets out the parties’ shared commitment for the UK to associate to Horizon Europe alongside Euratom R&T, Fusion for Energy and Copernicus at the earliest opportunity. The Government remain committed to securing this outcome so that research collaboration can continue, and we stand ready to formalise our association, but disappointingly there have been persistent delays from the EU, which has led to uncertainty for the UK sector and their European partners.

    UK and EU researchers and businesses have a long history of successful collaboration. As Europe’s leading R&D and science centre with world-class universities, scientists and innovators, the UK will bring a significant amount to the programme. Further delays will benefit neither the EU nor the UK.

    The Government’s priority remains association to Horizon Europe. UK researchers, businesses and innovators have been able to apply to calls as “Associated Candidates” since early 2021. So to provide reassurance to UK-based applicants, the Government have decided to guarantee funding for the first wave of eligible, successful applicants to Horizon Europe who have been unable to sign grant agreements with the EU.

    The guarantee is a short-term measure intended to address the continued delays from the EU to formalise the UK’s association to Horizon Europe. The funding will be delivered through UK Research and Innovation, which will publish details on how the guarantee will work including eligibility, scope and how to apply in the coming weeks.

    The Government have always been clear that our priority is to support the UK’s research and development sector and we will continue to do this in all future scenarios. As announced in the 2021 spending review, in the event that the UK is unable to associate to Horizon Europe, the funding allocated to Horizon association will go to UK Government R&D programmes, including those to support international partnerships.

    The Government looked at the practicalities of handling such a situation in 2020 and developed a detailed set of alternatives plans, which included continued support for international research, innovation collaboration and domestic research support. This work is being refreshed and we remain ready to implement these plans should they become necessary. I have written an open letter to the sector to set out my early thinking on the policy priorities should we be unable to associate, and will be inviting their views over the coming weeks.

  • Dominic Raab – 2021 Comments on Tony’s Law

    Dominic Raab – 2021 Comments on Tony’s Law

    The comments made by Dominic Raab, the Deputy Prime Minister, on 30 November 2021.

    The law must provide maximum protection to the most vulnerable and no-one is more vulnerable than a young child.

    So, we are increasing the maximum penalty for child cruelty causing or allowing serious physical harm from 10 years to 14 years, and the maximum penalty for causing or allowing the death of a child from 14 years to life imprisonment.

    I pay tribute to the courage of young Tony Hudgell and his adoptive parents Paula and Mark.

  • Boris Johnson – 2021 Comments on New Covid Measures

    Boris Johnson – 2021 Comments on New Covid Measures

    The comments made by Boris Johnson, the Prime Minister, on 30 November 2021.

    The measures taking effect today are proportionate and responsible, and will buy us time in the face of this new variant. Based on everything we know, our vaccines and boosters remain our best line of defence, so it is more important than ever that people come forward when eligible to get boosted. Not only will today’s steps help us slow down the variant’s spread, but they will help us protect each other and the gains we have all worked so hard for.

  • Angela Rayner – 2021 Speech on Cleaning Up Politics

    Angela Rayner – 2021 Speech on Cleaning Up Politics

    The speech made by Angela Rayner, the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, to the Speech to the Institute for Government on 29 November 2021.

    Thank you all for being here today and a particular thanks to the Institute for Government for hosting us today. Never has your role as an independent think tank, working in the public interest, been more vital.

    The IfG stands for impartiality and speaking truth to power, ideas that underpin much of what I have to say today.

    Twenty four years ago a Labour opposition exposed the sleaze engulfing the Conservative Party, and Labour governments legislated to clean it up.

    The Political Parties, Elections, and Referendums Act.

    The Electoral Commission.

    A Ministerial Code.

    Public registers of donations to political parties.

    The Freedom of Information Act.

    Transparency was the key and sunlight the best disinfectant.

    The last Labour government did not hesitate to act decisively to clean up British public life.

    And the next Labour government will act to stamp out the corruption that Boris Johnson and his government have polluted our democracy with.

    The truth is nobody could have predicted the corruption and shamelessness of Boris Johnson.

    The current system only works when there is respect for the rules and there are consequences for breaking them.

    Today – because of this Prime Minister – there is no respect for the rules and no consequences for breaking them.

    As on so many issues, his actions in office stand in stark and sad contrast to his words on taking office.

    In his own foreword to the Ministerial Code, the Prime Minister wrote that to win back the trust of the British people:

    “We must uphold the very highest standards of propriety.”

    “There must be no bullying and no harassment”.

    Yet when his first independent adviser on ministerial interests found his Home Secretary broke that code by bullying officials, it was the adviser who left government. And when an independent panel found one of his own MPs guilty of harassment, that government imposed a three line whip to keep him in Parliament.

    The Prime Minister promised:

    “No misuse of taxpayers’ money and no actual or perceived conflicts of interest”.

    He went on to give us the VIP lane for PPE contracts, the Randox lobbying scandal and the £3.5bn of taxpayers’ money lining the pockets of party donors and Ministers’ mates.

    The Prime Minister said that:

    “The precious principles of public life… Integrity, objectivity, accountability, transparency, honesty and leadership in the public interest – must be honoured at all times”.

    You’ll all be glad to hear I won’t list every example of his breaking those principles, or none of you would get out of her before dinner time.

    The current regime is no longer working precisely because we have a Prime Minister who is shameless in breaking the rules, and won’t enforce consequences on others who break them.  Corruption – that is the word – is happening in plain sight and it is rife right through this Conservative government.

    That is why we must now urgently rebuild public trust in politics and government. It is why we must go further than the last Labour government and stamp out the corruption that has engulfed Boris Johnson’s government and his party thanks to his own actions and inaction.

    No more Members of Parliament paid to lobby their own government.

    No more Ministers breaking the rules and getting away with it.

    No more revolving door between ministerial office and lobbying jobs.

    No more corruption and waste of taxpayers’ money.

    And that goes to the heart of why standards matter.

    Because the people who are picking up the bill are the taxpayers whose money Ministers are wasting and abusing.

    Families in my constituency and across the country have had £1,000 taken out of their pockets by this government. Care workers, nurses, delivery drivers, supermarket workers. The heroes who got us through the pandemic.

    And what thanks do they get in return? Conservative MPs lining their pockets with £1,000 an hour and Conservative Ministers giving billions to their mates.

    When there is so obviously one rule for the Prime Minister and his Ministers and another for everyone else, that corrodes trust in our democracy.

    People lose faith in government as a force for good in their lives.

    Because if anybody else breaks the rules at work or breaks the law then they will face the consequences.

    The veteran who loses their Universal Credit because the bus was late. The sole trader who falls foul of HRMC for losing a receipt. It’s one rule for the Prime Minister and another for everyone else.

    Our democracy cannot hinge on gentlemen’s agreements, it needs independent and robust protection.

    So today I am setting out how a Labour government will clean up our politics and restore that trust.

    We will start by setting tougher rules.

    We will ensure tougher enforcement of those rules, independently of political control.

    And we will protect taxpayers’ money against the abuses we have seen from this government.

    Two weeks ago we laid out our five point plan to clean up our politics and stamp our Conservative corruption.

    Today I will go further, setting out how our Independent Integrity and Ethics Commission will stamp out corruption in government, strengthen the rules and ensure they are enforced.

    The current system is broken.

    The Committee on Standards in Public Life found that they are too easily ignored or disregarded and the systems that “are supposed to uphold the rules are not working well”.

    That regulation of the Ministerial Code and of Ministers after they leave office “falls below what is necessary to ensure effective regulation and maintain public credibility”.

    Standards are currently governed by an alphabet soup of different committees, advisers, rules and codes of conducts.

    Ministers and former ministers can hide behind the loopholes, the disjointed processes and the lack of enforcement.

    And why is this the case? Because the rot starts at the top.

    Boris Johnson has lived his entire life bending and breaking rules.

    He has been investigated for breaking the rules in every office he has ever been elected to.

    He broke the parliamentary rules on his outside financial interests twice… So he tried to replace the independent Commissioner for Standards.

    The Electoral Commission investigated the dodgy deals that paid for his flat… So he is trying to give Ministers control of the Electoral Commission.

    His Ministers, MPs and advisers know that if they break the rules they will get away with it… Because they are just following his example.

    Boris Johnson has proved that rules are only as good as the mechanisms that are there to enforce them.

    Under this Prime Minister rules are broken but there is no punishment or sanction, or he just changes the rules after the fact.

    The Prime Minister has shown that he will only ever act in his own self-interest. Never in the public interest. He’s not just incapable but unwilling to do what is needed to tackle corruption and improve standards.

    The country now faces a choice

    Boris Johnson a Labour government that will stamp out Conservative corruption and restore trust in public office.

    The rules are only as robust as the processes that uphold them.

    We need to strengthen the rules – but we need to strengthen those processes too.

    Take the Independent Adviser on Ministers’ Interests.

    A vital role. Tasked with upholding standards in government, enforcing the Ministerial Code and investigating cases where Ministers break the rules.

    But the role of the Independent Adviser is toothless if the Prime Minister won’t act. And that suits Boris Johnson.

    The role of Independent Adviser is not independent. They are not allowed to be independent – investigations can only happen when the Prime Minister says so.

    And the Independent Advisor’s advice to Boris Johnson is not worth the paper it’s written on because he can simply ignore it, and does – as when the Home Secretary broke the Ministerial Code.

    Look at the example of the Prime Minister’s flat.

    In no other walk of life would the person under investigation be judge, jury and in charge of the person investigating. And surprise surprise the report concluded that the Prime Minister didn’t even know that the refurbishment was happening… In his own flat.

    When a Minister breaks the Ministerial Code, it is the Prime Minister who decides whether to investigate them and what sanctions they should face.

    Complaints are answered with explanations that the Prime Minister decided that there shouldn’t be an investigation… Case closed.

    Or that where there has been wrongdoing, no sanction is needed. Case closed again.

    Labour’s independent Integrity and Ethics Commission will replace this broken system.

    The Independent Integrity and Ethics Commission will have the power to open investigations into Ministers’ conduct… Without the approval of the Prime Minister.

    The Commission will have the power to access any evidence they need, and there will be clear sanctions for breaches of the Code so the Prime Minister is no longer judge and jury over the conduct of Ministers.

    And the Ministerial Code itself requires reform.

    Since I became Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster myself and Lord Geidt have become firm pen pals.

    It feels like barely a day goes by without me asking him to investigate a Minister’s misconduct.

    I know the Ministerial Code like the back of my hand… And I know that it needs updating and strengthening.

    Take the case of the former Health Secretary. When Matt Hancock broke the Ministerial Code a new phrase of “technical breach” was created out of thin air to get him off the hook.

    The grey areas give Ministers leeway to break the rules and make it harder to enforce the rules.

    So one of the first things the Integrity and Ethics Commission will do is consult on the changes that are required to update the Ministerial Code so it is fit for purpose.

    We also need to overhaul the rules that apply to former Ministers after they leave office.

    There can be no stronger evidence that the rules are broken than the case of David Cameron.

    If the former Prime Minister can text everyone in his phonebook to help his dodgy mate Lex Greensill get access to taxpayers’ money, try to help himself to a $200 million bonus and then rely on a defence that everything he did was within the rules…

    Then it is clear that the rules themselves are broken, and so is the system that is supposed to uphold the rules.

    The Committee on Business Appointments – ACOBA – was already a toothless watchdog but under this government it’s been muzzled and neutered.

    Forget the revolving door… We have a system where the door is held wide open for former Ministers who want to line their pockets as soon as they leave office.

    The system is pointless because the rules are too weak and there is no enforcement of them.

    The regulator says that former Ministers cannot make use of any information or contacts they made when they were in office… But what else are companies paying them for?

    Let’s face it… why else is Chris Grayling worth £100,000 a year? Someone will employ Gavin Williamson next.

    The Committee can’t even enforce its own rulings or take action when the rules are broken.

    When the Committee said that the former Chancellor Philip Hammond broke lobbying rules the Chair wrote to the Minister who is responsible for enforcing the rules. But the government ignored the Committee for 3 months, until I asked a parliamentary question… And then they finally replied – to agree that the rules were broken… but they won’t be taking any action to enforce the rules.

    So Labour will ban former Ministers from lobbying for at least five years after they leave office.

    No ifs, no buts. No letters after a role has already been accepted and no exceptions. A total ban. And consequences – including financial sanctions – if the rules are broken.

    Whether it is Philip Hammond being paid by a banker who got a £7 million bonus in the Budget, Steve Brine working for a healthcare company that got Covid contracts or the former Attorney General providing legal advice for a tax haven in a corruption case against the government he used to be a Cabinet Minister in…

    We will stop former Ministers profiting from public office, and we will close this revolving door for good.

    Public servants should serve the public without an eye on a cushy lobbying gig as soon as they leave.

    So the Integrity and Ethics Commission will enforce the rules on Ministers after they leave office too.

    Earlier this month I welcomed the latest report from the Committee on Standards in Public Life.

    I submitted my views to the Committee on behalf of the Labour Party and we welcome every recommendation. If we were in government we would implement every single one and in many cases actually go further.

    The Committee’s report provides a framework to improve standards in our public life.

    The only problem with the Committee’s work is that the Prime Minister will ignore it…

    I’m still asking Ministers when they will implement recommendations from their 2018 report.

    So the remit of the Committee on Standards in Public Life will be strengthened and brought into the Integrity and Ethics Commission.

    The Commission will be able conduct inquiries and advise the Prime Minister on standards across public life, just as the Committee does today, but with the power to ensure action is taken.

    The changes that I have set out today will overhaul the broken system that has failed to stop the spread of corruption under this Prime Minister.

    And we will put the Independent Commission on a statutory footing enshrined in legislation.

    Never again will a Prime Minister and his Ministers be able to break the rules with impunity because the rules are too weak, they aren’t enforced and it is the Prime Minister himself in charge of them.

    Under a Labour government the rules will be strengthened, enforcement will be toughened up and power and control over the rules will be taken away from those the rules hold to account.

    Boris Johnson’s corruption means that we must now urgently rebuild trust in our politics, in public office and in government as a force for good.

    That means rebuilding the regime that is not working.

    The British people deserve so much better than Boris Johnson’s corruption and failure.

    It will be a Labour government that cleans up our politics.

    And it will be a Labour government that makes our politics a force for good again.

    Thank you.

  • Thangam Debbonaire – 2021 Comments on Code of Conduct Report

    Thangam Debbonaire – 2021 Comments on Code of Conduct Report

    The comments made by Thangam Debbonaire, the Shadow Leader of the House of Commons, on 29 November 2021.

    Over the last few weeks, it has become clear that when one of their mates is found guilty of breaking the rules, this Government’s first instinct is to rip them up, rather than accept the punishment.

    The Standards Committee proposals to strengthen the MP’s Code of Conduct published today, are a welcome step in recognising that the processes around lobbying need addressing and that conflicts of interest need nipping in the bud.

    Labour supports a ban on directorships and paid consultancy and will examine the detail of the Committee’s final report when it comes in the new year to ensure any moves to do so are comprehensive and watertight. When the report is published, the House of Commons must be given the chance to fully debate and approve measures to toughen up the system.

  • Earl of Rosebery – 1886 Statement on the Blockade of the Greek Coast

    Earl of Rosebery – 1886 Statement on the Blockade of the Greek Coast

    The statement made by the Earl of Rosebery, the then Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, in the House of Lords on 10 May 1886.

    My Lords, I desire to lay upon your Lordships’ Table a Circular Despatch recapitulating the action of Her Majesty’s Government with regard to Greece, which I have addressed to Her Majesty’s Representatives abroad, and copies of the two Collective Notes to the Greek Government, and the replies to those Notes, as well as to the notice of blockade which was presented to the Greek Government on Saturday. The first of these Collective Notes was presented on April 26. It demanded that the Greek Army should be placed on a peace footing with the least possible delay, and that assurances should be given to the Representatives of the Powers in the course of a week from the date of the presentation of the Note that orders had been given accordingly.

    In reply to that Note the Greek Prime Minister sent an answer which will also be laid before your Lordships’ House, in which he refers to some communication which had taken place between himself and the French Minister at Athens. That communication, however, your Lordships will see, when you have it in your hands, did not offer any guarantee for that immediate disarmament which we could offer Turkey, and induce Turkey to disarm in her turn. During the week that followed no further communication was received from M. Delyannis. On Monday evening the delay proposed by the Powers expired. It was, however, the desire of the Powers to show all possible consideration towards the Greek nation, and Wednesday being the King’s fête day, their final answer to M. Delyannis’s reply was not declared till Thursday morning, saying that the reply was wholly unsatisfactory, unless supplemented by further declarations.

    The communication from M. Delyannis was to the effect that he had no further explanations to offer. On Friday morning the Representatives of Germany, Austria, Italy, and Great Britain left Athens, leaving their Legations in charge of the Secretaries. The Russian Minister could not be withdrawn, as he was not at Athens at the time. On Saturday the notice of the blockade was presented, and a blockade as against Greek ships of all kinds is at this moment in existence along the East Coast of Greece and the Gulf of Corinth. That is a bare record of facts; but before I sit down I will ask the indulgence of the House while I make one or two further remarks as to the sufficiency of M. Delyannis’s reply to the communication of the Great Powers. Your Lordships will be able to form your own judgment; but that judgment will be materially assisted by the speeches and Circulars of the Greek Prime Minister since he made those specific declarations.

    Only yesterday he made a speech announcing that he and his Government would never sign a decree of disarmament—a speech which absolutely justifies the contention of Her Majesty’s Government and of the other Powers, that while he had announced his intention not to attack Turkey, he had offered no guarantee that the menacing attitude of the Greek Army and the consequent strain both on that country and on Turkey might not be indefinitely prolonged. Moreover, the Greek and the Turkish Armies would have been left face to face with the constant probability of provocation and conflict. That state of things would have been the very danger to the peace of Europe which it has been the endeavour of the Powers by their action to avoid. In the next place, I have to point out that the interests of Great Britain in this matter are various and important.

    In the first place, there is the great interest which is always a paramount interest in the policy of this country—the maintenance of peace. In the next place, we have to remember the vast importance of upholding the decision of Europe—that is, of the Great Powers of Europe—in cases in which that decision can be usefully enforced; and, thirdly, we have had the interests of Greece and of Turkey to consider. The interests of Greece are sufficiently obvious. No sane friend of Greece could wish that she should embark in war with one of the great Military Powers of the world, even if she had a good cause to fight for. But, my Lords, that is not her present position. I cannot now take up your time with pointing out how unfortunate is the ground on which the Greek Government meditated this aggressive war. On some future occasion I may hope to have the opportunity of doing so. My Lords, the interest of Turkey in this matter is no less obvious. It is just five years since Turkey, on the strenuous intercession of the Powers, ceded the rich Province of Thessaly to Greece.

    It is hardly conceivable that the Turkish Government now should do otherwise than resist the proposal for another such cession. But while it is almost bound to resist this aggression the strain upon it is no less severe. The Turkish Government has an Army of over 300,000 men in its European Dominions, largely drawn from the Reserves; and the taking of the Reserves sufficiently indicates to your Lordships how great is the strain to which the agriculture of that country is subjected. I put aside the money required to maintain so vast an Army; but I do not put aside the injury to the peaceful inhabitants of the Turkish Empire—the men of which are torn from sowing and ploughing, and from those agricultural operations on which their subsistence depends.

    Wide districts have, therefore, the prospect of famine staring them in the face. Her Majesty’s Advisers, therefore, have strong grounds to proceed upon in using pressure at this juncture. My Lords, this is probably not the moment to make a long statement, and I will only say one more word. I have alluded to the importance of upholding what is popularly called the European Concert in matters of this kind. On this occasion, the European Concert has been very happily maintained. It is quite true that separate action has been taken by France; but I cannot doubt that that action has been taken with the same desire for a peaceful settlement of this question which is entertained by all the other Powers. As regards the other Powers, Austria, Italy, Germany, and Russia maintain a close and harmonious concert with us. That fact is of great importance; and in view of it I cannot doubt but that, coupled with the independent but parallel action of France, the exertions of the Powers will be crowned with success.

  • Lyon Playfair – 1886 Parliamentary Answer on Water Colours at South Kensington Museum

    Lyon Playfair – 1886 Parliamentary Answer on Water Colours at South Kensington Museum

    The Parliamentary answer given by Lyon Playfair, the then Liberal MP for South Leeds, in the House of Commons on 10 May 1886.

    We have already made arrangements to enable Dr. Russell, F.R.S., and Captain Abney, F.R.S., to carry out an exhaustive series of experiments on the action of sunlight, diffused light, and electric light on the various pigments used by painters in water colours. When these are complete, we shall be in a position to determine whether a more extended inquiry is necessary, and a scientific basis will be furnished for such further inquiry. At the same time, I may inform the hon. Member (Mr. Agnew) that from the statements made by the officers who have had charge of the Water Colour Collections at South Kensington, I have reason to believe that the works there exhibited have undergone little, if any, change since they were received. The skylights are made of rolled glass, so as to break and diffuse the light, and have blinds under the glass. Every care is, and will be, taken of the pictures, compatible with that exhibition to, and use by, the public for which they were acquired, whether by purchase or gift. The conditions of bequest frequently enjoin that the water colours shall be exhibited as freely and openly to the public as the oil paintings.

  • Nadine Dorries – 2021 Comments on Impact Start-Ups

    Nadine Dorries – 2021 Comments on Impact Start-Ups

    The comments made by Nadine Dorries, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, on 29 November 2021.

    From world-class AI discovering new treatments for Covid-19 to green energy solutions paving the way to a net-zero future, UK tech is transforming the world for the better.

    Our ‘impact’ startups are raising investment with nearly £2 billion in funding this year to help fight some of the most pressing problems we face as a planet.

    We want to harness the power of technology to make greener, healthier and safer choices and today I’m hosting the first Future Tech Forum in London to discuss how we can make that happen through future governance, policy and cooperation.

  • Nadine Dorries – 2021 Speech at the Future Tech Forum

    Nadine Dorries – 2021 Speech at the Future Tech Forum

    The speech made by Nadine Dorries, the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, on 29 November 2021.

    Good morning everyone.

    It’s an absolute pleasure to welcome you all to London, to the inaugural Future Tech Forum.

    It’s the first major summit I’ve hosted since becoming Digital Secretary in September and what better place to be hosting a discussion about the future of tech, than in the Science Museum?

    As you wander around this building over the next couple of days, you will spot “NeXTcube” – the computer that Tim Berners-Lee was sitting at when he designed the World Wide Web. With his invention in 1989, Berners-Lee set off a chain of events that have led us all here today.

    Because digital technology has fundamentally changed our way of life. In fact, the entire infrastructure of the global economy – and modern society – is now built around tech. The five biggest tech companies are now worth almost $10 trillion – more than the next 27 most valuable U.S. companies put together. Amazon is the third biggest employer on the planet. Apple’s stock is worth more than Belgium’s entire wealth.

    These companies track who we are, and what we like, and where we go and what we buy. They are an ever-present fixture of our daily lives. And they’ve done a huge amount to improve our existence. They connect us with friends and family. They’ve revolutionised working life. And given that the economies of some of these tech companies are the size of countries it’s great to see them tackling country-sized challenges like looking at tackling global welfare and development – as you’ll see in the first session with Microsoft today.

    Meanwhile, the pace of technological change is astounding. We’ve got doctors performing surgery in a room miles away from their patient, armed with a joystick and some 3D equipment. Groundbreaking companies are exploring wild ways to manipulate biology – like reviving the smell of extinct flowers to create new perfumes.

    At the same time, AI is everywhere – and getting more sophisticated by the day. Almost all experts think that within this century we’ll see a situation where machines are more intelligent than humans. In the long history of humanity, we are now officially living in the Digital Age. So it’s no wonder that governments all over the world are racing to set the rules for this new era.

    Because if there’s anything we’ve learnt over the last 20 years, it’s that without the right governance and values built in from the start, tech can create some very serious problems. Problems that are hard to fix once they’ve happened.

    Algorithms can send dangerous misinformation and poisonous abuse all over the world in a matter of seconds. Authoritarian governments can use tech to track, to intimidate, and to repress. News services can be blocked with the flick of a switch, and competitors crowded out with the tweak of an algorithm.

    All of this has ramifications: for our privacy, and prosperity and for society as a whole.

    And so I’m gathering you all here today to start a new and frank conversation about the future of tech: About how we can work together to harness its incredible potentially, particularly when it comes to tackling the biggest challenges we face, like climate change while protecting people from the darker side of the Digital Age.

    It’s on us, as like-minded partners, to make sure the tech revolution is a democratic one. And together, we’ll be discussing a number of challenges over the next two days.

    Like: How do we get the governance of tech right from the start, rather than playing catch-up? What are the issues we need to think about now, before the adoption of new and emerging tech becomes widespread? How do we ensure new technologies reflect our liberal and democratic values? And where do we need international solutions – given tech is global in its very nature – and how do we deliver them? Every country in the world is grappling with these very same questions but the UK is leading the way in answering many of them.

    The most obvious example is our Online Safety Bill, which we introduced in Parliament in July. That Bill is a truly groundbreaking piece of legislation. We’ll be going further than any other country to regulate social media platforms like Facebook, Twitter and TikTok.

    I know that the world will be watching what we do, and looking to follow our lead in many cases. We’ve got a 10-year plan to become a global AI superpower, through our National AI Strategy. We’ve broken yet more ground with a new, pro-competition Digital Markets Unit, to oversee the world’s most powerful tech companies.

    We’re at the cutting edge of deepening Digital Trade, and I’m particularly pleased to welcome colleagues from Singapore here today, with whom we’re negotiating a ground-breaking Digital Economy Agreement.

    And in a year of international leadership for the UK, we have used our presidency of the G7 to draw a number of lines in the sand about the future of tech: We agreed that as we tackle illegal and harmful content online, we should do so in a way that also protects fundamental democratic rights, like freedom of speech.

    We agreed to work together on digital technical standards, and to promote the trusted and free flow of data. We agreed to accelerate the use of digital technologies to boost trade. And finally, we agreed to secure critical digital infrastructure, like our telecoms networks. I want to build on that work over the next two days, as our G7 leadership comes to a close and that’s why I’m delighted that so many people have travelled from all over the world to be here today.

    We’ve got representatives from every corner of the planet – from the Republic of Korea to Kenya, Finland and the United States And I’m very excited about the UK’s new Digital Trade Network, which is going to make the most of fast-growing tech markets in the Asia Pacific region.

    But we know that governments can’t meet these challenges alone. We’ve got to change the existing model, and bring together government, industry and academia to write the next chapter of tech together. To work together in a way that is more collaborative, more frank and more honest than it has perhaps been so in the past.

    So the Future Tech Forum is bringing together the widest group of thought leaders from across government, industry and academia.

    As the Prime Minister said when he announced this summit in his speech to the UN General Assembly in 2019, we have pulled together the broadest possible coalition to take on this task. And if we get these questions right, the potential benefits for our countries are enormous. So as I officially open the Future Tech Forum, I’d like to finish by saying that I think we’re facing a fundamental choice about our future:

    Is tech going to be a force for good, or a force for bad? We’re all here today because we are determined to make it the former. So without further ado, let’s get things underway with the first session, on tech and democracy.

    I’m delighted to welcome to the stage:

    Former Danish Prime Minister and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen

    Microsoft Vice President John Frank

    And last but by no means least, my colleague Julia Lopez, the Minister for Media, Data and Digital Infrastructure.