The Bishop of St Albans received the following written answers on 22nd May 2025:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans asked His Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the 5Rights Children and AI Design Code, and what steps they are taking to assess the impact of AI on children.
Continue reading “Bishop of St Albans asks about impact of AI and smartphone use in schools for children”On 5th September 2024, during a discussion on the ability of current online safety legislation to regulate abuse, the Bishop of Leicester asked a question on the need to tackle the root causes of prejudice leading to online abuse, and the role communities and faith groups can play in helping to combat it:
The Lord Bishop of Leicester: My Lords, I recognise absolutely the urgency and importance of legislation in this area, but does the Minister agree that equally important is the work of tackling the prejudice that lies behind online abuse, and the important role therefore of intermediate institutions such as community groups and faith groups in tackling prejudice? What are the Government doing to support those groups in that work?
Continue reading “Bishop of Leicester asks about tackling online abuse and prejudice”The Bishop of St Albans received the following written answers on 2nd September 2024:
The Lord Bishop of St Albans asked His Majesty’s Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Sharpe of Epsom on 23 May (HL4639), when the findings of the feasibility study on the possibility of developing prevalence estimates for female genital mutilation and forced marriage will be published.
Continue reading “Bishop of St Albans asks about violence against women”On 13th February 2024, during a discussion on the proliferation of AI being used to create intimate images without consent, the Archbishop of York raised a point of clarification on the difference between malicious and non-malicious sharing of these images:
The Lord Archbishop of York: My Lords, it would be very helpful if the Minister could explain. If I heard him correctly, he said that sharing has a six month ban but for malicious sharing it could be up to two years. Could he explain what non-malicious use would be?
Continue reading “Archbishop of York asks about non-consensual creation and sharing of intimate images”On 12th July 2023, the House of Lords debated the Online Safety Bill in the report stage. A vote was held on an amendment to the bill, in which a Bishop took part:
On 10th July 2023, the House of Lords debated the Online Safety Bill in the second day of the report stage. A vote was held on an amendment to the bill, in which Bishops took part:
On 10th July 2023, the House of Lords debated the Online Safety Bill in the second day of the report stage. The Bishop of Oxford spoke in support of a group of amendments to the bill stipulating that online harms can arise from functionality and design of services as well as from content:
The Lord Bishop of Oxford: My Lords, as often, it is a pleasure to follow the noble Baronesses, Lady Harding and Lady Kidron, and to support this group of amendments, especially those to which I put my name. I thank the Minister and the Secretary of State for the many amendments they are introducing, including in the last group, on which I was not able to speak for similar reasons to other noble Lords. I especially note Amendment 1, which makes safety by design the object of the Bill and makes implicit the amendments that we are speaking to this afternoon, each of which is consistent with that object of safety by design running through the Bill.
Continue reading “Online Safety Bill: Bishop of Oxford supports amendments on definition of online harms”On 6th July 2023, during the first day of the report stage on the Online Safety Bill, the Bishop of Oxford spoke in support of amendments targeting the spread of misinformation and disinformation online, particularly with regard to the risk posed to children:
The Lord Bishop of Oxford: My Lords, I too welcome these amendments and thank the Minister and the Government for tabling them. The Bill will be significantly strengthened by Amendment 172 and related amendments by putting the harms as so clearly described in the Bill. I identify with the comments of others that we also need to look at functionality. I hope we will do that in the coming days.
I also support Amendment 174, to which I added my name. Others have covered proposed new subsection (9B) very well; I add my voice to those encouraging the Minister to give it more careful consideration. I will also speak briefly to proposed new subsection (9A), on misinformation and disinformation content. With respect to those who have spoken against it and argued that those are political terms, I argue that they are fundamentally ethical terms. For me, the principle of ethics and the online world is not the invention of new ethics but finding ways to acknowledge and support online the ethics we acknowledge in the offline world.
Continue reading “Online Safety Bill: Bishop of Oxford speaks to amendments on misinformation and disinformation online”The Bishop of Oxford spoke in support of a group of amendments to the Online Safety Bill designed to encourage a focus on safety by design in technology and online services, and to provide frameworks for assessing risk, on 6th July 2023:
The Lord Bishop of Oxford: My Lords, I broadly support all the amendments in this group but I will focus on the three amendments in the names of the noble Lord, Lord Russell, and others; I am grateful for their clear exposition of why these amendments are important. I draw particular attention to Amendment 281A and its helpful list of functions that are considered to be harmful and to encourage addiction.
Continue reading “Online Safety Bill: Bishop of Oxford supports amendments on safety and risk assessment”On 6th July 2023, the House of Lords debated the Online Safety Bill in the first day of the report stage. The Bishop of Manchester spoke in favour of a government amendment to the bill introducing a new introductory clause setting out the purpose and duties of the act, and voiced his support for the collaborative way in which the bill had been produced:
The Lord Bishop of Manchester: My Lords, I too support the Minister’s Amendment 1. I remember vividly, at the end of Second Reading, the commitments that we heard from both Front-Benchers to work together on this Bill to produce something that was collaborative, not contested. I and my friends on these Benches have been very touched by how that has worked out in practice and grateful for the way in which we have collaborated across the whole House. My plea is that we can use this way of working on other Bills in the future. This has been exemplary and I am very grateful that we have reached this point.
The Church of England in Parliament 
You must be logged in to post a comment.