Notices by Mariano delli Santi (marianods@mastodon.bida.im)

And Chris Bryant MP (LAB) is finally done talking about govt amendments. The opposition takes the floor and of course, let's talk again about copyright and AI...

The most interesting aspect of this debate is, however, how the conservatives and labour are flirting among each others at stating how good this legislation will be in enabling x, y, z—where these letters mean using your data against your consent or despite the detrimental impact this may have on you. One may wonder what kind of change did we vote for at last year's general elections?

But here it comes, the conservative's MP talking about an amendment on “accuracy of sex data”. I.e, a provision that would force digital verification services to misgender trasgender people and only record their “sex at birth” rather than their, well, actual gender

It is rather astonishing the conservatives' take on the need to ensure “accurate data” for the purposes of enabling digital verification services. Accuracy should be ensured, in their view, by stripping you out of your right to self-determination, and leaving to someone else's the decision to determine your gender.

The conservatives now move to discuss amendments that would prevent children from accessing social media. Or not, as the conservatives are now denying that this is an amendment about this

Interestingly, Chin Onwura MP (LAB) takes the floor and criticises govt proposals around AI and copyrights. She says, they give all the power to large technology companies and don't introduce meaningful incentives for big tech companies to support the copyright industry

Chi Onwura MP (LAB) also criticises provisions that would allow the use of data, without consent, for research purposes. She points out the provision is too broad and open to be abused for commercial purposes, ie to create ads or by Palantir to misuse NHS health data for what **they call** research purposes

Quite a blow from Chi Onwura MP (LAB) to the Labour government: she mentions a letter from the Minister which defends the research exemption by stating that “we can trust large technology companies to use it responsibly”. (As always, I need to remind whoever is reading that this is not how you write legislation: legislation is meant to prevent abuse, not to wishfully think that everything will just work out fine)

Final shout out to Chi Onwura MP (Lab) points out that the problem with data. Nowadays, rests on data use being imposed on individuals and used to strip them of rights, personality, agency. We'll see how this translate in government policy

The LibDems also intervene with similar yet different talking points to the conservatives— i.e. raising the age of consent under data protection law, and copyright and AI.

The LibDems also bring forward an amendment on automated decision-making that would, at least partially, roll back on government plans to strip individuals of their right not to be subject to automated decision-making

A Labour MP also takes the word to challenge the government position on AI and copyright. The arguments are pretty standard, but it definitely shows that the government is becoming more and more isolated in their policy positions, even within its own ranks

Challenge to the govt by its own MP: if you cannot accept these amendments on copyright and AI, fix the issue of transparency at the Lords' stage

I didn't get her name or affiliation, but one MP is presenting an amendment to introduce a statutory duty to “record data about jews and sikhs”. Oh gosh, what could possibly happen if we start drawing list of jews, and doesn't this idea sound familiar?

I'll have to, once again, tap the “innocent questions” sign. This is a statue outside of the Oslo holocaust memorial that reminds how census data, and in particular the field religion, enabled nazi Germany to enter a country, feed census data to an IBM machine, and get a list of jews and their home addresses https://www.dreyblatt.net/innocent-questions-2006/

Ian Duncan Smith MP (CON) coming out swinging against allowing personal data transfers to China. Which is interesting, given his support for the DUA Bill that liberalises personal data transfers to unsafe jurisdictions but hey, we'll take this

Another MP takes the floor to remind the government that the issue with use of data for research is that private corporations can abuse this power for reasons that do not align with research or the public good

This MP continues by warning about health insurers: what of they could have access to your data and use this to rip you off by increasing their insurance premium?

He also mentions the issues related to Palantir: how on hearth is it possible that a military company in the US which stands completely opposite to the values and ethics of the NHS be allowed to have such a central role in managing the health data of UK residents?

Finally, after long and convoluted interventions regarding AI, copyright, personality rights etc, we finally come back to data protection, again with criticism from MPs around the research exemption and the potential for private companies to abuse such a broad definition