Bishop Steven told the House about an interfaith peace vigil which was held in Oxford recently, bringing together diverse communities from across the city in a call for peace, remembrance and unity.
Here is the text of his speech:
My Lords, I want to thank the Minister for her very, very compassionate and clear speech, statement and the tone in which it is delivered. If I may, other noble Lords who have spoken will speak about these terrible, terrible events and the effect they are having on our own communities. I was privileged to take part on Sunday evening, the anniversary of the last day of relative peace, in a large community and interfaith vigil in Oxford and for Oxford and Oxfordshire.
Despite terrible weather, well over 200 people came together, drawn from the Muslim, the Jewish, the Christian communities, other faiths and those of no faith. We listened to our local council leaders, our civic leaders from the county, the vice chancellors of our two universities, and other representatives of the community.
It was an enormous encouragement and comfort to see the way in which different sections of the community were able to come together and to make a stand for peace, in remembrance, in lament, for all that has been lost and in a common commitment to community cohesion.
My Lords as other noble Lords have said already, this is a particular conflict which places almost unique strains on our own communities in the United Kingdom. Could I ask the Minister to say what the Government is doing and plans to do in the future to encourage this deeper and greater community cohesion as these stresses no doubt continue in the year which is to come?
https://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Bishop-Steven-Lords-debate.jpg398731Steven Crofthttps://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-blog-logo-300x117.pngSteven Croft2024-10-10 15:57:402024-10-10 16:03:04House of Lords debate on Gaza and conflict in the Middle East
My Lords it’s a privilege to contribute to this debate. I congratulate the new ministers and express appreciation to Baroness Barron and to Baroness Jolly for her valedictory speech. There is much to commend in the gracious speech.
A few weeks ago Pope Francis addressed the leaders of the G7 on the risks and opportunities of artificial intelligence. Francis spoke of the way in which artificial intelligence arises from God given human potential. He spoke of the excitement at the possibilities these powerful tools will bring. He spoke of the risks of greater inequalities; of impersonation; and of the need for deep and humane wisdom and ethics and the right political leadership. Pope Francis demonstrated a deep humanity not only in his words but in the way he embraced each leader in the room and lightened for a moment the heavy burdens each carries.
My encouragement to the government is to hold together these very significant developments in technology with deep insights into our humanity on the other: what it means to live well; to build flourishing societies; to enable the wellbeing of all. We must equip our young people be masters of technology not slaves to algorithms; able to put the science to good use but not allow its creations to distort our humanity. The deep ethical questions raised by the sciences will run across every part of the government’s legislative programme but I will focus on three themes if I may.
The first is the intersection of work and technology. An increasing number of people now work for and with algorithms. The quantity and quality of work is changing. Work is fundamental to human flourishing. The new skills and employment bill must have regard to the question of satisfying and rewarding work not only in respect of income but also agency, autonomy and creativity in daily work and the ability to create safe and humane workplaces for the flourishing of all.
The second is the opportunity and risks of data: the need to ensure that every citizen derives maximum benefit from the secure use of data and every citizen is protected from exploitation by individuals or corporations whether in health or education and skills. I would ask the minister what will be the government’s approach to risk in terms of the deployment of untried technologies which have the capacity to do harm? Will security extend to security of data? This seems a vital question given global events today.
The third is to urge that the well being of children and the vulnerable remains at the heart of the government’s approach to technology. Any society will be judged by its care for the young. We have seen two decades of unregulated exploitation of children for commercial gain by social media companies. I welcome very much the resolve of the Secretary of State to further strengthen and enhance the Online Safety Act. We do not yet fully understand what makes for a good digital childhood. Many childrens lives are ruined through overexposure to technology. I urge the government to be bold when it comes to the protection of children online.
Every development in science and technology reveals a little more clearly the wonder of what it is to be human and asks us to mine the deep treasures of wisdom in faith and our common humanity. Will the government dare to hold in tension both knowledge and wisdom for the sake of the flourishing all.
https://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/07/Bishop-Steven-Lords-debate.jpg398731Steven Crofthttps://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-blog-logo-300x117.pngSteven Croft2024-07-19 14:28:572024-07-19 14:29:19The impact of technology on human flourishing
Some of us might have been surprised to see Artificial Intelligence so high on the agenda for the Prime Minister’s meeting with the President Biden this week. The President pledged to support Britain’s convening of a major global conference on AI regulation later this year.
The calling of the conference is part of the government’s response to a series of concerns about AI voiced by leading figures in the tech industry in recent months warning of the need to regulate both research and deployment of AI. Many of you will know that I have been working in this area now for a number of years in my work in the House of Lords and for three years as part of the government’s Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation. This seems a good moment to bring the Synod and the Diocese up to date on the potential and concerns around AI and also with developments in the Online Safety Bill.
Artificial Intelligence is developing apace and is affecting every part of our lives. Global investment is increasing. New products are rolled out with bewildering speed. Microsoft launched Chat GPT on 30th November last year. By January it had become the fastest growing consumer software application in history gaining over 100 million users worldwide. Chat GPT is currently leading the field among new AI’s available to the public based on Large Language Models: the manipulation not just of data but of language in a way which seems human and intelligent. Chat GPT is already transforming search, the way children do their homework and possibly the way clergy prepare sermons. Version 4 was launched in March; an App came out in May. Microsoft will incorporate a version into Office later this year.
The software has the potential to reshape the legal profession, call centres and knowledge based enterprises. Other developments in AI are transforming medicine particularly in the rapid diagnosis of cancers or more accurate scanning and in the development of remote medicine.
There is huge potential here but also significant jeopardy. Two of the three godfathers of AI, Geoffrey Hinton and Yoshua Benigio have sounded warnings about research and deployment running much faster than regulation and public debate. In May a coalition of industry experts including the head of the company which developed Chat GPT and of Google Deep Mind issued a serious warning that Artificial Intelligence could lead to the extinction of humanity. They argue that:
“Mitigating the risk of extinction from AI should be a global priority alongside other societal scale risks such as pandemics and nuclear war”.
What are the risks? They include the weaponization of AI by bad actors; the generation of misinformation to destabilise society, including in elections; the concentration of power in fewer and fewer hands enabling regimes to enforce narrow values through pervasive surveillance and oppressive censorship”; and enfeeblement, where humans become dependent on AI.
These warnings are not uncontested and we are currently seeing a pushback against some of these dire warnings. We are probably decades away from an autonomous general artificial intelligence. These Terminator like scenarios can be used to distract attention from the more immediate but real dangers – such as the rapid deployment of facial recognition technology in security and policing without proper governance. But more not less public debate is needed which is mindful both of the immense good this technology can enable and the severe harm.
What then has this to do with the Church and with Christians? We clearly need to engage in an informed way as this technology develops for the sake of present and future generations. As Christians we have a distinctive understanding of human dignity and person hood and what it means to be human. Our identity is rooted in the faith that humankind is made in the image of God, to quote Genesis 1. We place our faith and trust in our Father in heaven who made us and who loves us. We are able to work in partnership with technology and machines of all kinds. But not uncritically.
If technology undermines personal safety or dignity, through stripping away capacity for creativity and meaningful work, then we should be concerned. If technology undermines the democratic process or public truth, we should sound a warning. If the development of autonomous weapons gives life and death decisions to a machine we should raise our voices in every way possible.
Second, our understanding of what it means to be human is rooted in the incarnation. We believe that Almighty God, maker of heaven and earth, became a human person in a particular time and place to redeem all of humanity in every time and place. There is no higher statement of value and worth for humankind that the truth that God became a person in Jesus and a person who embodies the distinctive Christian character of the beatitudes: contemplation in a relationship with God, compassion in love for the world and courage in a desire for justice and for peace. We are called to embody those values in the life of the Body of Christ, the Church.
This means again that the Church will need to be both critical and cautious in response to new technologies. Our humanity is not negotiable. We need to say clearly that the future of humankind is not unlimited enhancement and mechanisation and automation and delegation. We will want to see robust public debate and good governance which is alert to dangers. We will want the commonly owned values of our society, based on our Christian inheritance, to be lived out online as well as offline. We will want to ensure a strong role for government in regulation. If this is in the hands of major global tech companies then power and wealth and influence will be concentrated in an ever smaller group of unaccountable technocrats. We will want to see strong human- AI partnerships as a foundational principle in medicine, in law enforcement, in automation of work, in education.
And third our understanding of our humanity is formed by our faith and trust in the Holy Spirit, who gives life to the people of God. The Spirit of God comes to dwell within the heart and life of the believer, to give life in all its fulness, to form us into the likeness of Christ and to empower us to change God’s world for the better.
The Spirit leads us into all truth, we believe. One of the concerns to be alert to in this present phase of AI development is truth and authenticity. The new tools make the creation and dissemination of authentic deep fakes much easier. How do we know on the night before an election that the picture of the politician saying or doing something terrible is true or not? If Chat GPT or Google tells us that something is true, how do we test that in the real world if the internet is our only source of information? The preservation of truth has to be one of the highest priorities in a democracy and for the Church.
One of the other marks of the Spirit’s life is creativity. Remember in Exodus how the Spirit is given to skilled workers in fabrics and metals and wood in the building of tabernacle; remember how the Spirit inspires architects and builders and musicians and the arts.
The new generation of AI has a massive capacity for creativity. For the very first time we can all access a tool which will write a greetings card in the style of a Shakespeare sonnet or produce a new play or opera. So far the quality is not high – but it will get better.
My colleague Simon Cross, who is funded by the Templeton Foundation and works with me on these issues, has recently summed up the shift in the new generation of AI tools in this way:
The first iteration of digitalisation extracted data about us. In the first digital world, facts like our age, ethnicity, location and viewing habits could be extracted – or inferred with ever increasing granularity – and then used to tailor our attention: surveillance to sell. But the onus was on our information and opinions, not our ideas. There have been a host of downstream harms and unintended consequences that we are still discovering. But now, even before that first clean up is complete, Generative AI is coming for our creativity. Everything, but everything we write, or say, or sing, or paint, or draw, or sculpt, or… everything: all of it, is – or soon might be – hoovered up inside a ‘foundation model’, because our creativity is the coal that powers this new generative AI furnace.
What will the consequence be for our humanity and identity if AI takes the major share of human creativity: the arts as well as the sciences. The answer is that we become less than human, less than we can be. The spark of the divine image begins to be extinguished. We need to be alert; we need our prophets; we need to preserve truth and creativity and dignity for future generations.
Finally, as Simon argues there, the first clean up is not yet complete. Indeed it has hardly started. The Online Safety Bill currently in Committee Stage in the House of Lords is a key piece of legislation. It is not yet strong enough and over the last three months I’ve been working with a cross party group of peers, charities and agencies, and connecting with MPs, to seek to strengthen the Bill, with Simon’s support and that of other Lords Spiritual.
I am increasingly convinced that the world has created a deeply toxic environment for the mental health of children and adults through social media. We will look back on the last two decades and the lack of regulation in future years with disbelief. The range of harms affects every section of society but children and the vulnerable most of all.
The Letter of James is absolutely clear about the power of the tongue and of words to do harm.
“How great a forest is set ablaze by a small fire. And a tongue is a fire….a restless evil…. full of deadly poison.”
This fire, this evil, this deadly poison is magnified a hundred fold by social media and online engagement and has a massive effect on peoples real lives in a range of ways. The multiplication happens through 24 hour access even in our most private spaces; through the clever fostering of addiction; through algorithms which drive the most controversial content to our feeds and now increasingly through AI generated material.
The harms caused to children by pornography have been a feature of several of amendments and especially for strong age assurance and verification protection.
Adults too are not immune to harm from social media as many here will know. The Bill needs to be further strengthened as at attempt to regulate the damage already done. We need to learn from the damage caused by the last 20 years of social media to better regulate for the next generation. The government has not yet agreed to the major changes which are still needed though there is still time to do this.
There may yet come a moment when it will be helpful for members of this Synod to write to their MP’s on this matter.
There is much that can be done in local churches and schools to help and support parents and children in responsible approaches to the internet. We will be giving consideration later in this Synod to the magnificent work of our Board of Education and our engagement with children and young people now and into the future. I hope this address sets a context both in outlining some of the challenges the next generations will face, the need to monitor and limit access to social media and the resources of Christian faith to establish and build a vital core of Christian identity rooted in God the Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
Photo: Spirit of God awakens a new life, both dead and alive, detail of stained glass window by Sieger Koder in church of Saint John in Piflas, Germany (c) Shutterstock
https://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Synod_june_23_presidential_blog.jpg321845Steven Crofthttps://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-blog-logo-300x117.pngSteven Croft2023-06-10 14:01:262023-06-10 14:01:26Rooted in God the Trinity, Father, Son and Holy Spirit
The Bishop of Oxford, raises concern about online harms, powers, and disinformation in the second reading of the Online Harms Bill in the House of Lords.
https://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/clay-banks-XvS-uKUoUao-unsplashweb.jpg321845Steven Crofthttps://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-blog-logo-300x117.pngSteven Croft2022-05-25 22:07:422022-05-25 22:07:42AI in the UK: No room for complacency
The Bishop of Oxford spoke in a Second Reading of the Schools Bill in the House of Lords on Monday 23 May. Read the full text of his speech or watch on Bishop Steven’s Facebook page.
https://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/DSCF7523blog.jpg321845Steven Crofthttps://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-blog-logo-300x117.pngSteven Croft2022-05-24 10:19:292022-05-24 10:23:29The responsibility of all
The Age Assurance (Minimum Standards) Bill had its second reading in the House of Lords on Friday 19 November. The Bishop of Oxford spoke in support of the bill. Read the text of his speech, or watch on Bishop Steven’s Facebook page.
My Lords, it is a real pleasure to follow the noble Lord, Lord Russell, and indeed every other noble Lord who has spoken in this debate. It has been extraordinary and very moving. I join other noble Lords in congratulating the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, on securing this Second Reading and on her passionate and brilliant opening speech. With others, I thank and commend her for her tireless commitment to protecting children online. That she does so with such consistent grace and good humour, against the backdrop of glacially slow progress and revelations about both the variety and scale of harms to children, is no small achievement in itself.
One of my interests in this debate is the more than 280 church schools and the more than 50,000 children who are a precious part of my diocese of Oxford. A substantial proportion are at significant risk for want of this Bill. The primary responsibility of the Government is the protection of all their citizens and especially and particularly those unable to protect themselves. Future generations will, I think, look back on the first two decades of this century and our unregulated use of technology with deep pain and regret, as they reflect on the ways in which children are exposed to harmful material online, the damage which has followed, and will follow, and our tardiness in setting effective regulation in place. We will be judged in a similar way to those who exploited child labour in past generations.
Children are precious to God and to society, not as potential adults nor in the future tense but simply and completely in themselves. Each is of immense value. The evidence is clear that many are emerging from a digital childhood wounded and scarred in ways which are tragic but entirely preventable.
The Government make much of being pro-business in support of the emerging technologies of this fourth industrial revolution but, if they are equally serious about making the UK a safe country to be online, they really must do more to be pro-business in ways that protect children. Other noble Lords have movingly pointed out the many risks our children face whenever they venture online.
We now know with increasing certainty how it is not only other users, so-called bad actors, but many online service providers themselves—not least Facebook, or now Meta—that target children, their data extracted, their identities manipulated, their impulses exploited. It should be noted that many of these same service providers say they would welcome clear guidance and regulation from the Government, even while other businesses say they already possess the tools and opportunities to do this both safely and profitably.
The age-appropriate design code is a welcome and genuinely world-leading innovation, and the Government would do well to note—against the siren voices denying technical feasibility or fearing the balkanisation of the internet—that businesses, the service providers, have now found it easier to standardise their processes to the highest regulatory watermark globally in the interests of reducing costs and complexity. This bodes well for the principle-based and proportional approach to age verification that the Bill artfully encapsulates.
As others have asked, what possible reason can there be for further delay? If protecting children is good in and of itself; if business publicly expresses the need for clearer guidance on how to frame that protection; when business itself sees commercial opportunity in the tools for protection; when a regulator is now waiting in the wings; after government delay already threatens a lost generation—why is the Bill from the noble Baroness, Lady Kidron, not being eagerly and urgently adopted by the Government themselves, if that is indeed the case? I hope we will hear good news today. I eagerly await the Minister’s answer.
The report But how do they know it is a child?published by the 5Rights Foundation, is an important contribution to the ongoing debate on age verification, estimation and assurance.
https://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/shutterstock_1160840914.jpg321845Steven Crofthttps://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-blog-logo-300x117.pngSteven Croft2021-11-22 09:33:192022-01-11 08:52:08The Age Assurance (Minimum Standards) Bill
https://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/shutterstock_735976063-e1542664028550.jpg7891250Steven Crofthttps://blogs.oxford.anglican.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/2019-blog-logo-300x117.pngSteven Croft2018-11-20 17:00:422022-01-11 08:54:23Move fast and mend things
We may request cookies to be set on your device. We use cookies to let us know when you visit our websites, how you interact with us, to enrich your user experience, and to customize your relationship with our website.
Click on the different category headings to find out more. You can also change some of your preferences. Note that blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience on our websites and the services we are able to offer.
Essential Website Cookies
These cookies are strictly necessary to provide you with services available through our website and to use some of its features.
Because these cookies are strictly necessary to deliver the website, refuseing them will have impact how our site functions. You always can block or delete cookies by changing your browser settings and force blocking all cookies on this website. But this will always prompt you to accept/refuse cookies when revisiting our site.
We fully respect if you want to refuse cookies but to avoid asking you again and again kindly allow us to store a cookie for that. You are free to opt out any time or opt in for other cookies to get a better experience. If you refuse cookies we will remove all set cookies in our domain.
We provide you with a list of stored cookies on your computer in our domain so you can check what we stored. Due to security reasons we are not able to show or modify cookies from other domains. You can check these in your browser security settings.
Google Analytics Cookies
These cookies collect information that is used either in aggregate form to help us understand how our website is being used or how effective our marketing campaigns are, or to help us customize our website and application for you in order to enhance your experience.
If you do not want that we track your visit to our site you can disable tracking in your browser here:
Other external services
We also use different external services like Google Webfonts, Google Maps, and external Video providers. Since these providers may collect personal data like your IP address we allow you to block them here. Please be aware that this might heavily reduce the functionality and appearance of our site. Changes will take effect once you reload the page.
Google Webfont Settings:
Google Map Settings:
Google reCaptcha Settings:
Vimeo and Youtube video embeds:
Other cookies
The following cookies are also needed - You can choose if you want to allow them:
