TL;DR
At departmental questions in the Commons on 15 October, Liberal Democrat MP Olly Glover asked AI minister Kanishka Narayan whether the government would back a call from more than 85 parliamentarians to make the UK’s G20 presidency in 2027 the platform for an international agreement that regulates AI and prohibits the development of superintelligence. Narayan did not commit to a ban, but said the government would seek a leading role in agreeing “a global code and principles for safe AI”.
The exchange
Glover, who represents Didcot and Wantage, opened with the upside: his Oxfordshire constituency includes the Harwell and Culham science campuses, and he said AI could transform research there. Those benefits would only arrive, he told the House, if the risks were treated seriously.
According to Hansard, Narayan replied that the Prime Minister has said AI “will be top of the agenda” for the G20, and that the UK “will look to play a leadership role”. In reply to Glover’s tabled question, on how ministers are regulating AI, he listed existing areas of focus: data protection, competition, equality law and online safety. He said he would work with MPs of all parties on any additional measures needed to tackle harms.
In comments reported by the Herald Series, Glover said the threat from superintelligent AI “is real” and that he was “pleased to hear the minister acknowledge the need for the UK to take a lead on the world stage”.
The letter behind it
The cross-party letter Glover cited went to the Prime Minister in September, according to the Herald Series, and calls for a global agreement to stop superintelligent AI being developed. The Lib Dems have pressed the issue before: we reported on party leader Ed Davey’s proposal for a global AI agency in September.
Looking forward
The gap between the two positions is clear in the record. Glover asked for a prohibition; the minister offered principles. In our view, how the UK frames AI on the G20 agenda will show whether a ban stays a backbench demand or becomes something the government is willing to negotiate. For businesses, the more immediate signal is that the minister pointed to existing laws first, while leaving the door open to further measures.