Tag: United Kingdom

The prime minister has warned of the “new dangers and new fears” that will come with the development of Artificial Intelligence technology.

It comes as the PM attempts to set the stage for the UK to host an AI safety summit at Bletchley Park next week.

“The right speech for me to make is to address those fears head on”, he said.

New analysis from the government says that AI has the potential to “enhance” terrorist capabilities, including in propaganda, weapons development and the planning of attacks.

It comes as deputy prime minister Oliver Dowden told Times Radio this morning: “I do and we have seen in successive elections technology imposing an effect on our elections.”

He added: “I also take it seriously in respect of our elections. The thing about AI is actually twofold. One, it can proliferate the range of actors that can participate in this space, so more people can create those kind of deep fakes, and as you say, it can also make them more convincing.”

POLITICS LATEST:

10.14 am — Rishi Sunak is asked whether the government will regulate AI, including as part of the King’s Speech on 7 November.

He responds: “I think we shouldn’t be in a rush to regulate for a number of reasons.”

He adds the approach is to invest heavily and “more so than anyone else”.

10.00 am — Rishi Sunak is asked whether it would be sensible to slow down development of AI so experts can better understand the risks.

He responds that the government has published a report today “to give people honesty and transparency about the risks that we see”.

He adds: “One of those is potentially increased risks to safety and security because what AI does is enhance the ability of bad actors to do things”.

Addressing the new AI safety Taskforce, he says: “I can give everyone the reassurance that we are ahead of the curve on this.”

9.51 am — Rishi Sunak is asked how the government will support people who have their jobs impacted by AI.

Rishi Sunak says that people should think of AI as more of a “co-pilot”. He mentions an example of a care worker who can use the technology to help with paperwork.

9.45 am — Rishi Sunak closes: “When I think about why I came into politics, frankly, why almost anyone comes into politics, it’s because we want to make life better for people, to give our children and our grandchildren a better future. And we strive hour after hour policy after policy, just trying to make the difference.

He adds: “If harnessed in the right way, the power of possibility of this technology could dwarf anything any of us have achieved in a generation. And that’s why I make no apology for being pro technology.

“It’s why I want to seize every opportunity for our country to benefit in the way that I’m so convinced that it can. And it’s why I believe we can and should look to the future with optimism and hope”.

9.44 am — The prime minister confirms investment in a super computer “thousands of times faster than the one you have at home”.

9.43 am — Rishi Sunak says “AI can also help us solve some of the greatest social challenges of our time. It can help us finally achieve the promise of nuclear fusion, providing abundant, cheap, clean energy with virtually no emissions”.

9.42 am — Rishi Sunak says “only governments can properly assess the risks to public security”.

The UK is building “world leading capability” to assess the safety of AI models in government, he adds.

9.40 am — Rishi Sunak says he “won’t hide” the risks of AI as he points to an assessment published that provides a stark warning.

He says: “Get this wrong, and AI could make it easier to build chemical or biological weapons, terrorist groups could use AI to spread fear and destruction on an even greater scale”

9.35 am — Rishi Sunak begins by detailing a visit to Moorfields Eye Hospital, which is using artificial intelligence to diagnose a range of conditions.

He says he believes technology like AI will bring “a transformation as far reaching as the industrial revolution”.

He adds that despite positive innovation, there are also “new dangers and new fears” that come with the introduction of AI.

“The right speech for me to make is to address those fears head on”, he explains.

Source

Rishi Sunak faces the prospect of another by-election after MPs approved a six week suspension for Peter Bone, who is accused of bullying and sexual misconduct against a staff member.

The House of Commons approved the sanction against the MP for Wellingborough, who is sitting as an independent after losing the Conservative whip over the allegations earlier this month.

A recall petition is now being arranged for his constituency of Wellingborough. If 10 per cent of voters sign the recall petition, a by-election will be held.

Bone was elected at the last general election with a majority of 18,540, smaller than recent Conservative by-election defeats in Tamworth (19,634), Mid Bedfordshire (24,644), Somerton (19,213) and Selby (20,137).

Polling indicates Bone’s Wellingborough seat could flip to Labour.

Bone’s suspension had been recommend by Parliament’s Independent Expert Panel (IEP)after it found Mr Bone broke sexual misconduct rules by indecently exposing himself to the staffer during an overseas trip.

He was found to have “committed many varied acts of bullying and one act of sexual misconduct” against a staff member in 2012 and 2013.

The MP said the allegations were “false and untrue” and “without foundation” last week.

He said: “As I have maintained throughout these proceedings, none of the misconduct allegations against me ever took place. They are false and untrue claims”.

It came after Parliament’s Independent Expert Panel upheld an earlier investigation that found he broke the MPs’ code of conduct on four counts of bullying and one of sexual misconduct.

The report found he “verbally belittled, ridiculed, abused and humiliated” the employee and “repeatedly physically struck and threw things” at him.

The complainant at the centre of the case has told the BBC it was a “horrid, brutal, dark experience that left me a broken shell of the young man I once was”.

“His temper was often explosive. I described it as like a pendulum”, he said.

“They call it a siege mentality in terms of the relentless shouting, the screaming, the hitting.”

Shadow leader of the House of Commons Lucy Powell has called for Bone to resign.

She said: “The people of Wellingborough deserve an MP they can be proud of. The country deserves the change that only Labour can bring.”

Source

Until yesterday, only ministers were able to correct the official record of what was said in parliament. Beneath this apparent technicality is a simple story: our system was fundamentally broken, making accountability next to impossible.

This meant that correcting mistakes wasn’t always a priority for our elected representatives. It also meant that MPs who wanted to show us that they could lead with honesty and integrity, by promptly correcting their mistakes, were not able to do so. At its heart, not being able to correct the official record made it impossible to put honesty front and centre in parliament.

That is now going to change. MPs who make mistakes will be able to correct the record to make sure that their words don’t mislead people in the future. The visibility of corrections will be improved on Hansard, the official record, and everyone will be able to see when MPs correct the record on an easily accessible corrections page.

This means we will be able to demand a higher standard from all of our MPs – if they can correct the official record after they get something factually wrong, why wouldn’t they? And why wouldn’t their peers hold them accountable when they do make mistakes? All parliamentarians will now face an added pressure to champion honesty and accuracy in public life.

This has been made possible through the pressure of more than 50,000 Full Fact supporters, who have helped to champion our campaign to fix a broken corrections system and restore honesty in politics.

And to be clear: this is not about trying to expose MPs to further criticism, or to catch them out. Full Fact wants to increase trust in politics, not diminish it. But that has to start with our elected representatives taking the lead.

Today marks one year since our prime minister took office, when he promised to lead with honesty and integrity. The prime minister, unlike MPs, has always been able to correct the record. Yet since October last year, we have asked him to correct the record five times with no response.

This is just one example of how much change is needed before our political system can truly be considered fixed. Our campaign win does change parliament’s rules, and will help stem the tide. But we now need to tackle the source.

Next, we need to see MPs routinely making corrections on social media, showing willingness to avoid misleading their constituents and the thousands of people who follow them. It is not enough to delete a tweet: MPs should be helping create a good information environment.

And there must be consequences for false or misleading claims that are not corrected. We want to see MPs holding each other accountable through debate, written questions and relevant committees. And we will continue to campaign for a new mechanism in parliament, to deal with any MPs who refuse to correct the record in egregious circumstances..

Honesty needs to become a priority. Political parties need to review their own internal policies to make sure they champion corrections. And we need to see a general election where politicians on all sides prioritise accuracy and transparency.

But the hard work can’t just be left to MPs – inaccurate and misleading claims can cause damage on social media and the airwaves. Broadcasters should be ready to review their policies and practices when it comes to correcting false and misleading claims made by politicians, undoing the damage done as far as is realistic and possible.

On Monday, we saw MPs debating whether to make lying in parliament a criminal offence. The public cares about this issue. Full Fact research showed that 71% of the population believe there is more lying and misuse of facts in politics and media now than 30 years ago. We also know that a lack of faith in politics has been a top 10 concern for the public for more than 12 months. This problem isn’t going anywhere.

Until our leaders start to champion honesty in politics, our work will not be done.

Source

There was some confusion over who the Leader of the Opposition (LOTO) was at prime minister’s questions today. At one point, when Keir Starmer was due to speak, Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle motioned to Conservative MP Simon Hoare, who was down on the order paper for a pop at the PM. 

Although the Northern Ireland select committee is an esteemed body, Sir Linday’s involuntary promotion of its chair, Hoare, to LOTO prompted a great deal of laughter in the chamber — and some confusion from Starmer as he bobbed through the Speaker’s gaffe. 

Hoare later joked it was the “first time I’ve been confused with the Leader of the Opposition”. Sir Lindsay guffawed: “There’s been many rumours”.

On another occasion, the Speaker scolded Rishi Sunak for giving an extended pre-prepared speech about Labour’s housing policies. But, before the PM could finish his question about how Starmer “stood in the way” of plans to “unlock 100,000 new homes”, Sir Lindsay rose to his feet. “Just to say, it’s prime minister’s questions, not opposition questions”, he insisted.

It won a sarcastic nod from the prime minister, and once more Sir Lindsay rose: “I’m sorry, prime minister. It is prime minister’s questions, I don’t need you nodding against my decision”. 

By my reckoning, it was Sir Keir Starmer with the six questions today — a privilege he is afforded because of his status as the leader of the second largest party in the commons. So, with Sir Lindsay’s confusion covered, how did he deploy them?

Not, as many had speculated, to clarify his stance on the Israel-Hamas conflict. (He was due for a meeting with concerned Muslim Labour MPs and Peers at 12.45 pm, immediately after PMQs, and may have feared further interventions would make matters worse after a botched Mosque visit and LBC interview blunder). Rather, at PMQs today, Starmer boasted about his party’s recent by-election victories in Mid Bedfordshire and Tamworth. 

It is the second session in a row the Labour leader has been able to welcome a new MP to his backbench ranks; last week, Michael Shanks, who bested the SNP in Rutherglen and Hamilton West, was name-dropped by his party chief. 

But this time it was far more politically potent, as Starmer flaunted his party’s ability to rout the Conservatives in their own heartlands. 

The prime minister put on a brave face and laughed through Starmer’s barbs. He joked that the new member for Mid Beds might “support him more than the last one”, a reference to Nadine Dorries. It drew chuckles and knowing nods from all sides of the House.

But soon Sunak was down to business: “I did notice that the new member [for Mid Bedfordshire] said that they will be opposing new housing in their local area”, Sunak said — attempting to lever open a gap between what Labour says in parliament and on the doorstep.

After last week’s outbreak of harmony over the Israel-Hamas conflict, it was a break-neck return to political normality. Sunak added: “But with his track record of U-turns, who knows what his housing policy will be next week”.

As for Starmer, with those seismic by-election victories providing the perfect backdrop, the Labour leader seized on a post shared by the Conservative candidate for Tamworth, Andrew Cooper, in 2020 which suggested jobless parents who cannot feed their children should “F*** off” if they still pay a £30 phone bill.

Starmer insisted the candidate must have thought he was “following government lines” by “throwing expletives at struggling families”, as he told stories of both renters and homeowners being hit hard by rising costs and being “abandoned” by the government — especially since Liz Truss’ disastrous mini-budget last autumn.

Sunak was prepared for Starmer’s attempt to raise the spectre of Truss (he does this most weeks), as he declared the Labour leader “did support 95 per cent of the things it that ‘mini’-budget”. It prompted confused noises in the chamber and the press gallery alike, especially after it was announced yesterday that Sunak would be axing the cap on bankers’ bonuses — a policy straight out of the Trussonomics playbook. Indeed, scrapping the cap featured highly among Truss’ slate of policies in the “mini”-budget — and, crucially, Labour did not support it. 

This being the first “normal” PMQs after party conference season, there was a question of how far the prime minister would lean into his positioning as the “change candidate” — a standing he debuted at the Conservative fête last month. We quickly got our answer: “Politicians like him [Starmer] always take the easy way out”, said Sunak. “Whereas we’re getting on, making the right long-term decisions to change this country for the better — on net zero, on HS2, on a smoke-free generation, on education and energy security”.

“Contrast that to his leadership”, he added, “too cautious to say anything and hoping that nobody notices”.

The Labour leader dismissed the remarks, instead calling for a general election. “So will he just call a general election and give the British public a chance to respond as they did in Selby, Mid Beds and Tamworth? 

He wrapped up: “They’ve heard the government telling them to ‘F*** off’, and they want the chance to return the compliment”.

So jeery — even sweary — politics is back, it seems; but with Starmer under pressure within Labour on the Israel-Hamas conflict, a small victory here will be dwarfed by broader and growing party-management issues elsewhere. Still:

PMQs Verdict: Starmer 4, Sunak 2.

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Twitter here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website, providing comprehensive coverage of UK politics. Subscribe to our daily newsletter here.

Source

Today marks one year since Rishi Sunak replaced Liz Truss as Prime Minister. 

Anniversaries, generally, are junctures for those marking an occasion to collectively reminisce — as well as to consider the possible paths that lay ahead. Politically, therefore, depending on the context into which a special date is received, they can be moments of particular merriment or outright acrimony. As for Rishi Sunak, his official spokesperson said yesterday the the PM is “more focused on the continual delivery for the public than marking an anniversary”.

No change there, is what Sunak’s strategists want you to think. But as No 10 draws attention to Sunak’s purported professionalism, there is no avoiding the fact that a period of reflection — from all of the public, journalists and MPs — is really the last thing the prime minister needs. For the former, certainly, the more they seem to consider Rishi Sunak’s premiership, the less they appear to like it.  

One key theme of Rishi Sunak’s premiership a year in has been the transformational impact his time in Downing Street has had on his personal poll ratings. Once elevated some way above his party’s, over the course of the last 12 months they have slowly sunk to those of the Conservatives at large. Sunak had a net favourability of -9 when he took office last October, it is now around -40 — eerily similar to the Conservative Party as a whole at -46, which has remained pretty constant over the past 12 months. 

It wasn’t meant to be this way. Back in October last year, it was hoped that the prime minister’s strong poll ratings relative to his party would slowly lever up the Conservatives’ lagging numbers. This analysis informed a highly personalised mode of governance as the PM pledged to fix the problems his party had both overseen and, on other matters, outright caused. A string of “PM Connect” events followed as Sunak was sent to address the hoi polloi whose “trust” he now so coveted.

Thus, from the wreckage of Liz Truss’ premiership, Sunak emerged with a pointed focus on “fixing things”. Out with the new and in with the orthodoxy, was the throughline of everything Sunak said in his first months as PM: through stability and delivery, No 10 calculated, the public would learn to love the Conservatives again.

But, as Sunak’s premiership has developed, it has become apparent his immediate success in calming a financier class shaken by Trussonomics was the easy bit. After a year of Sunak, the public still views the Conservatives, and more and more so their prime minister, dimly indeed. 

Cue a coruscating article on the PM’s fortunes, published last week, with the innocuous title “How has Rishi Sunak’s reputation changed after one year as PM?”. Even more reassuring for readers on Downing Street is that it was penned by some sober wonk at YouGov — that neutral interlocutor between protean public opinion and interested politicos. But don’t let Matthew Smith’s ostensibly harmless “Head of Data Journalism” job title fool you — his conclusions, informed by data collated over the course of a year and sans caveats, are devastating. Brace yourself for a sample:

On the eve of his accession to 10 Downing Street, public expectations for Rishi Sunak were mixed: 25% expected him to be “good” or “great” as prime minister, 29% “average”, and 29% “poor” or “terrible”.

A year into the job, Sunak has not lived up to these limited expectations. Half of Britons say he has been a poor or terrible PM (50%), while just 11% think he has been good or great. A third consider him average (33%), which is the prevailing opinion among Conservative voters, at 48%. Three in ten Tory voters (29%) rate Sunak’s first year in office badly, while 20% think his performance has been positive.

There are a number of pertinent data points raised by Smith; but, as he notes, perhaps the most interesting is Sunak’s ratings on the economy. Over the course of the past 12 months, the PM’s reputation for managing the economy has declined starkly — that is despite semi-consistent falls in inflation and the UK’s technical avoidance of recession. 

At the time Sunak took office, YouGov’s data found Sunak’s management of the economy was the only major issue of an outlined 12 where a clear margin of Britons expressed confidence in the PM. Then 50 per cent of Britons had confidence in Sunak’s economic skillset, compared to a more sceptical 31 per cent. 

Now, only 31 per cent trust the PM to effectively manage the economy, with 62 per cent having little to no confidence in him. Meanwhile, 75 per cent of the public now distrust the PM on immigration, 72 per cent distrust him on the NHS, and 71 per cent on the cost of living. 

What is also significant is the new data on Sunak’s handling of what YouGov refers to as the Israel-Palestine conflict. This shows Sunak is distrusted on dealing with the matter with a net -30 score. This is a new issue — but the public instinctively assume the prime minister will handle it poorly. 

There will be other factors at play here, of course; but the PM prides himself on his performance on the international stage. His diplomatic efforts have been a core theme of his premiership, including on the Isreal-Hamas conflict with Sunak having delivered a series of statements to the House of Commons on the subject and visited the Middle East last week  in a trip aimed at avoiding escalation. 

And what of the PM’s prized reputation for competence? The public now see him as incompetent by 46 per cent to 34 per cent. As Smith notes, “this represents a 40 point net drop, from + 28 to -12”.

So the public thinks your rubbish

Step back and YouGov’s polling data both justifies and problematises Sunak’s recent relaunch at Conservative Party conference. 

First, it is clear from YouGov’s polling that the public at large is not happy with Sunak’s record as prime minister. A No 10 strategist might calculate, therefore, that new rhetorical emphasises are needed to broaden the discourse beyond their man’s problem areas. Focussing on clear diving lines and amping up pressure on Starmer over HS2 and net zero, the theory runs, could ease the pressure on the government and force voters to consider their enthusiasm for Labour. 

But, conversely, the figures also show that Sunak’s overriding problem is not messaging or style — but policy delivery. The public has taken to judging Sunak, perhaps unsurprisingly, on his own terms: and on the economy, the NHS and more, they do not like what they see. Sunak has deep-seated political problems, and they will not be fixed by tampering with net zero targets or ditching the HS2 line to Manchester. 

A consistent criticism of Sunak’s relaunch holds that there is no glue to cement his new pitch against “30 years of vested interests standing in the way of change”. In hindsight, “delivery” was supposed to be the core theme of Sunak’s premiership, the glue that held his government together and cohered his pitch to the public. But the view of the electorate, as expressed in the YouGov data is stark: Sunak isn’t working.

So, with the PM once again facing calls to reset his government amid perennial criticism over being too managerial, too nice and not political enough — one wonders where he turns. The big risk for Sunak is that as YouGov’s line graphs continue to express a downward trajectory in his personal ratings, he will be forced into more and more difficult conversations with his party. Further intra-party strife will then deepen public discontent directed at the Conservatives and, if the trend holds, the party will drag Sunak’s ratings down with it.  

The question strategists in No 10 will now be grappling with is: how do you change public perceptions that have taken such a strong hold over the preceding 12 months, with only around 12 months left? There are upcoming events where the Conservative Party could display a change in approach — such as at the King’s Speech, the Autumn Statement or in a reshuffle — but there is no escaping the fact that something needs to change drastically if Sunak is to shift the dial before an election. 

Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Twitter here.

Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website, providing comprehensive coverage of UK politics. Subscribe to our daily newsletter here.

Source

After announcing yesterday that the government will close 50 so-called migrant hotels over the next three months, Robert Jenrick said this morning that housing asylum seekers in hotels was “never the right policy”. 

Jenrick made a statement to the House of Commons yesterday in which he announced that the government will close 50 asylum hotels in the coming months, with more to follow after that.

It has been reported that another tranche of 50 hotels be closed by April.

Jenrick was asked this morning if it is true that none of the hotels closing to asylum seekers are in Labour constituencies.

He told Sky News that there was a “list of different constituencies” and that some of the closures are “of course” in Labour constituencies. 

“They’re a mix of different constituencies and in all four nations across the country. We don’t release the list for security reasons.”

Pressed whether this includes hotels in Labour areas, Jenrick said: “Of course, absolutely.”

He said that housing migrants in hotels was “never the right policy”, adding that it was “borne out of the very large numbers that were coming across a year or two ago, now fewer people are crossing thankfully — although there is a great deal more to do, [and] as a result we’re able to make this first step”.

He said that asylum seekers previously in hotels will now be housed in “cheaper and more appropriate forms of accommodation”.

He named “large military sites, the barge in Portland, and we’re finding cheaper forms of housing in areas across the country” as examples of the government’s work in this area. 

Elsewhere, Jenrick argued that high levels of illegal migration are putting “unbearable pressure” on housing and public services.

He said small boats crossings were “risking community cohesion”, telling Times Radio: “You have to stop the boats. You have got to reduce the amount of illegal migration into this country because it is placing unbearable pressure on our housing, our public services and risking community cohesion.

“As you say, rightly, we have been extremely generous as a country. Since 2015 we have granted over 530,000 humanitarian visas to Ukrainians, Hong Kongers, Syrians, Afghans and those from elsewhere in the world.

“That is the largest number of people coming into the country on humanitarian grounds in our modern history.

“It is just not possible for us to keep supporting such large numbers of illegal migrants and that is why we are taking the steps that we are to deter people from coming to this country with important policies like the Rwanda policy and that is why we are working hard to smash the people smuggling gangs and destroy the business model that they operate.”

Source