← Back to House of Commons Debates
The Bill Name (not specified in the provided text) - Schedule 1 - Enforcement and Appeals
16 June 2026
Lead MP
Victoria Collins
Debate Type
Bill Debate
Tags
No tags
Other Contributors: 29
At a Glance
Victoria Collins raised concerns about the bill name (not specified in the provided text) - schedule 1 - enforcement and appeals in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.
How the Debate Unfolded
MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said:
Lead Contributor
Opened the debate
I beg to move, That the clause be read a Second time. The speaker is moving for the second reading of Schedule 1 which focuses on enforcement measures and appeals processes in the bill.
The speaker supports the second reading of Schedule 1, emphasising its importance for enforcing compliance with regulations and providing a clear appeals process.
Acknowledged the importance of digital sovereignty but highlighted challenges such as reliance on Taiwanese chips in the tech market. He asked how these challenges could be addressed.
Jim Shannon
DUP
Strangford
Emphasised the importance of Belfast's cyber security capabilities and its contribution to UK resilience, stressing that such powerhouses should be fully integrated into the national strategy.
Chingford and Woodford Green
The hon. Member was prescient in raising concerns about IOT devices, especially those containing kill switches from bad actors like China, which could devastate some industries such as energy.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Proposes an amendment to prohibit data sharing with jurisdictions that cannot guarantee a fair trial, citing examples of transnational repression from totalitarian states. He emphasises the need for Parliament to be involved in decisions about such jurisdictions and highlights cases like Jimmy Lai and Ryan Cornelius to illustrate the risks.
Matt Western
Lab
Warwick and Leamington
Argues that cyber-attacks have intensified globally, with UK being the most attacked nation in Europe. Proposes including food supply chain operators as essential services to avoid threats during crises like pandemics. Advocates for critical risk thresholds for managed service providers to prevent sector-wide impacts from a single breach.
Alex Sobel
Lab
Leeds North West
Supports the new clause, arguing that it ensures robust checks and balances against government overreach. Emphasises the need for intervention in case of AI security emergencies due to rapid technological advancements. Cites legal precedents such as the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and highlights the potential costs of inaction compared to compliance burdens.
Intervenes to raise concern about Transport for London's procurement of 500 Chinese buses on the streets of London, highlighting potential embarrassment if 'kill switches' are ever used.
Chi Onwurah
Lab
Newcastle upon Tyne Central
Agrees with Mr. Downie's emphasis on raising awareness about cellular IOT modules and adds that dependency on software updates from providers could also leave systems vulnerable to hostile attacks.
Melanie Ward
Lab
Aberdeen South
Emphasised the need for new regulations to address cyber-security risks posed by AI. Cited statistics on increased cyber-incidents and argued for a 'kill switch' to protect against catastrophic risks from data centres. Noted that planning laws must be updated to accommodate data centre locations more appropriately, highlighting environmental impacts in Auchtertool, Scotland. Raised concerns about the pace of technological development outpacing regulatory frameworks.
[INTERVENTION] Questioned whether the Bill adequately addresses misinformation and disinformation threats, referencing a case in Epsom where X’s algorithm amplified false information about riots. Suggested that strong safeguards against such threats should be included.
Harlow
Welcomed conversations about protecting local government and electoral services, highlighted the importance of recruiting skilled cyber-security professionals, supported a culture shift towards greater awareness and preparedness for cyber threats. He also mentioned that over 11,000 NHS appointments were lost due to cyber-attacks last year and praised the Government’s investment in tackling these threats with £210 million.
Luke Myer
Lab
Redcar
Referenced a 2020 cyber-attack on Redcar and Cleveland council by the Russian Conti syndicate, costing over £10 million. Emphasised the need for last-resort powers in relation to data centres and called for a national conversation about these issues. He also endorsed amendments dealing with internet-of-things modules and stressed the importance of addressing hostile state disinformation on social media.
Jim McMahon
Lab
Oldham West and Royton
Mr. Jim McMahon raises serious concerns about foreign malign forces impacting UK institutions such as Parliament, highlighting the need for a strong and unified response from all parties in addressing these threats.
Ms. Victoria Collins clarifies that their amendment aims to establish a strategy rather than demanding full sovereignty, encouraging reconsideration of the proposed changes.
Mr. Jim Allister agrees on the importance of excelling UK-wide in digital sectors and opposes subjecting parts of the UK to EU regulations, advocating for unified AI governance under this Parliament.
Matt Western
Lab
Warwick and Leamington
Questions the rationale for excluding sectors such as retail from the Bill's scope, arguing for alignment with European Union standards on cyber security. He seeks a broader approach to protect the economy and citizens in all circumstances.
Chi Onwurah
Lab
Newcastle upon Tyne Central
Challenges the Minister's interpretation of cyber security requirements, questioning whether government intervention is limited only to threats that immediately endanger life. She highlights recent incidents involving large businesses like Marks & Spencer and Jaguar Land Rover to argue for more comprehensive measures.
Requests further clarification from the Minister regarding the inclusion of retail in cyber security regulations, emphasising concerns over large businesses' lack of adequate cyber security measures.
Alex Sobel
Lab
Leeds North West
Asked the Minister to commit to a meeting with himself and his colleague Melanie Ward to discuss data centre, AI development, and network issues further.
Asked about specific threat of internet-of-things modules and requested information on protections against such threats in the legislation.
Inquired if Northern Ireland would be subject to EU’s AI laws or the UK Bill, seeking clarity on governance rules for businesses operating there.
Chingford and Woodford Green
Asked the Minister to reconsider his position on amendments that address issues of fair trial, emphasising the need to safeguard British citizens in countries with weak rule of law.
Chi Onwurah
Lab
Newcastle upon Tyne Central
Asked for assurance that the Minister will work with her, her Committee and other Members to look at the need to safeguard where there are technology-specific risks.
Withdrew new clause 2 without giving detailed reasons for its withdrawal, possibly indicating lack of support or further negotiations needed.
Julia Dockerill
Con
Hornchurch and Upminster
Supports the Bill's principles but argues that it is insufficient due to rapid advancements in AI and cyber threats. Raises concerns about legacy IT systems, concentration of risk, and potential targets for cyber-warfare. Highlights the need to address vulnerabilities posed by Chinese manufacturers and the importance of a robust procurement process for digital technology.
Supports the extended scope of the Bill and its move towards enhancing cyber-resilience. Emphasises the need for a digital sovereign strategy to ensure resilience, security, and economic strength.
Raises a point of order regarding reports of Russian warship activity near UK-registered yachts in the English Channel, seeking guidance on how to be urgently updated by the Government.
Caroline Nokes
Con
Romsey and Southampton North
Responds to Calum Miller's point of order, noting that she has had no notice of an intended statement but suggests the Government Front Bench will provide updates if necessary.
▸
Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy
About House of Commons Debates
House of Commons debates take place in the main chamber of the House of Commons. These debates cover a wide range of topics including government policy, legislation, and current affairs. MPs from all parties can participate, question ministers, and hold the government accountable for its decisions.