Latest news with #CommonsCommittee
The Guardian
11-07-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
Social media incentivised spread of Southport misinformation, MPs say
Social media business models endangered the public by incentivising the spread of dangerous misinformation after the 2024 Southport murders, MPs have concluded, adding that current online safety laws have 'major holes'. The Commons science and technology select committee called for new multimillion-pound fines for platforms that do not set out how they will tackle the spread of harmful content through their recommendation systems. The MPs warned that rapid advances in generative artificial intelligence, which allows for the creation of convincing fake videos, could make the next misinformation crisis 'even more dangerous' than last August's violent protests after three children were killed by a man wrongly identified online as an asylum seeker who had arrived by small boat. They also called for AI-generated content to be visibly labelled and said divisive and deceptive content amplified on social media after the attacks may have been part of a foreign disinformation operation. 'It's clear that the Online Safety Act [OSA] just isn't up to scratch,' said Chi Onwurah, the committee chair, after a seven-month inquiry. 'The government needs to go further to tackle the pervasive spread of misinformation that causes harm but doesn't cross the line into illegality. Social media companies are not just neutral platforms but actively curate what you see online, and they must be held accountable.' Neither misinformation nor disinformation are harms that firms need to address under the OSA, which only received royal assent less than two years ago. State-sponsored disinformation can amount to an offence of foreign interference. The report examines the role of platforms including X, Facebook and TikTok, and comes after this week's opening of a public inquiry into missed opportunities to prevent the killing of Bebe King, six, Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, and Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, on 29 July last year. Just over two hours after the first call to the emergency services, a post on X claimed the suspect was a 'Muslim immigrant', and within five hours a false name, 'Ali al-Shakati', was circulating on the same platform, the MPs found. Within a day, these two posts had received more than 5m views. In fact, the attacker was Axel Rudakubana, a British citizen born in Cardiff. Another X post that evening calling for violence towards asylum hostels received more than 300,000 views, and the next day the false name was on X's 'Trending in the UK' list. TikTok suggested to users under its 'others searched for' function the words 'Ali al-Shakti arrested in Southport', and by the end of the day after the attack social media posts with the false name had accrued 27m impressions and violence had broken out outside Southport mosque. On 3 and 4 August a Facebook post called for violence against the Britannia hotel in Leeds, where many occupants were asylum seekers. The committee called for fines of at least £18m if platforms do not set out how they will tackle significant harms that derive from content promoted by their recommendation systems even if it is not illegal. It concluded: 'The act fails to keep UK citizens safe from a core and pervasive online harm.' It called on the government to make social media platforms 'identify and algorithmically deprioritise factchecked misleading content, or content that cites unreliable sources, where it has the potential to cause significant harm.' But it stressed: 'It is vital that these measures do not censor legal free expression.' The MPs called on ministers to extend regulatory powers to tackle social media advertising systems that allow 'the monetisation of harmful and misleading content', with penalties rising depending on severity and the proceeds used to support victims of online harms. The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology has been approached for comment. Ofcom said it held platforms to account over illegal content but stressed that the scope of laws requiring platforms to tackle legal but harmful content was a matter for the government and parliament. A spokesperson said: 'Technology and online harms are constantly evolving, so we're always looking for ways to make life online safer. We're proposing stronger protections including asking platforms to do more on recommender systems and to have clear protocols for responding to surges in illegal content during crises.' TikTok said its community guidelines prohibited inaccurate, misleading or false content that may cause significant harm and it worked with factcheckers and made any content that could not be verified as accurate ineligible for its 'for you' feed. X and Meta were approached for comment.
Yahoo
09-07-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Welfare reforms risk leaving stain on Labour, MP warns
A Labour MP who led a rebellion against the Government's benefits plan has labelled it an 'omnishambles', which she warned could leave disabled people worse off. Rachael Maskell said pressing ahead with the welfare reform Bill risked leaving 'such a stain' on her party, as she urged ministers to scrap a proposed change to the out-of-work element of universal credit. Ministers have proposed increasing the universal credit standard allowance at least in line with inflation until 2029/30. But the Government has proposed freezing the 'limited capability for work' (LCW) part of the benefit until 2030, and new claimants who sign up for the 'limited capability for work and work-related activity' payment will receive a lower rate than existing claimants after April 2026, unless they meet a set of severe conditions criteria or are terminally ill. Commons Work and Pensions Committee chairwoman Debbie Abrahams urged the Government to push back its reforms until November 2026. 'This is to allow for the NHS capacity to ramp up and to ensure funding follows health need, so that people with newly required conditions or impairments can receive early treatment and a better aligned labour market that will enable them to return to work quickly,' the Labour MP for Oldham East and Saddleworth told the Commons. 'Without this, there is the risk that 45,000 more newly disabled people and their children will be pushed into poverty.' Ms Abrahams described her pitch as a 'reasonable compromise', costing £141 million in lost savings. Ms Maskell tried to block the Bill's progression at second reading last week using a reasoned amendment, which failed by 149 votes to 328, majority 179. Around 90 minutes before that vote, social security minister Sir Stephen Timms promised in an intervention to halt a proposed reform to the separate personal independence payment (Pip) benefit, with any changes now only coming in after a review. 'The cart before the horse, the vote before the review, and this omnishambles of a Bill, these people with fluctuating conditions not knowing where they stand, and for that, nor where any of us stand by the end of today,' Ms Maskell said on Wednesday. The York Central MP had earlier said: 'No matter what spin, to pass the Bill tonight, this will leave such a stain on our great party, founded on values of equality and justice.' She urged MPs to gut the Bill of plans to roll out a lower rate of out-of-work benefit for new claimants from 2026 and freeze the LCW component. 'Their contention is my contention – sick and disabled people have not been consulted,' Ms Maskell added. I voted against the UC&PIP Bill. It's now due back for next stage in Parliament. My next Amendment 👇would safeguard those with fluctuating conditions, or a recurrence of a condition from being placed onto a lower rate of universal credit#York #UC #PIP — 💙Rachael Maskell MP (@RachaelMaskell) July 9, 2025 She has proposed that current out-of-work benefits claimants should not be put on the proposed lower rate of out-of-work benefit, if they slip out of and then back into the eligibility criteria either side of the changes. 'If someone has a fluctuating physical or mental health condition like multiple sclerosis, schizophrenia, cystic fibrosis, or other recurring muscular-skeletal condition, if following a period of remission and work then relapse and returning to universal credit, unless unequivocally stated, they will return onto the pittance of £50-a-week for their health element,' she said. Sir Stephen intervened and asked her to acknowledge 'how the Bill protects people in exactly the situation that she describes', where claimants are prone to seasonal conditions such as chest infections over the winter. If a pre-2026 claimant slips out of being eligible for universal credit but meets the eligibility criteria again within six months, the Bill would demand that they have been 'continuously entitled to an award'. It would mean that they could go 'straight back onto the position they are in at the start', the minister added. Green Party MP for Brighton Pavilion Sian Berry has proposed increasing the standard allowance beyond inflation by 4.8% from April 2026. Currently, the Bill would set the uplift at 2.3% in 2026/27, rising to 4.8% by 2029/30. Ms Berry said this could be paid through a wealth tax, and added her change would go 'some way' to set universal credit according to 'an objective assessment of what people need'.
The Independent
29-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
Question marks over global impact of Trump tariff ruling
Experts are warning of economic uncertainty and confusion for countries negotiating trade deals with the US after a court ruling blocked President Donald Trump 's tariffs. The White House has appealed the decision, potentially delaying trade talks and existing deals, except for tariffs on steel, aluminium, and cars. Experts say the ruling casts a "cloud" over any trade negotiations with the US as the country's legal position is unclear. While some parties see the ruling as beneficial for countries like the UK by preventing the quick imposition of tariffs, others worry about intensified tariffs on sensitive sectors. The uncertainty has already led some UK firms to abandon the US market, and a Commons committee is set to investigate trade with the US, while calls are being made for clarification from the US ambassador.
The Independent
13-05-2025
- Business
- The Independent
UK Government no longer ‘global charity', aid minister to tell MPs
The new aid minister will tell MPs that the days of the British Government acting as a 'global charity' are 'over', when she faces a Commons committee on Tuesday. Baroness Jenny Chapman will face the Commons International Development Committee for the first time since taking the aid role in February. Her appointment followed the resignation of Anneliese Dodds, who quit as development minister in protest at the decision to cut the aid budget to fund increased defence spending. She is expected to use her appearance before the committee on Tuesday to set out plans to focus aid spending on sharing British expertise, rather than providing money, telling MPs: 'The days of viewing the UK Government as a global charity are over.' Saying the Government remains 'committed to international development', she will add: 'We need to prioritise, be more efficient and focus on impact above all else. 'We have to get the best value for money, for the UK taxpayer, but also for the people we are trying to help around the world.' In February the international development budget was reduced from 0.5% of gross national income (GNI) to 0.3%. Coming shortly after US President Donald Trump's administration effectively gutted the US agency for international development, opponents suggested the UK cut would lead to lives being lost in the developing world. But Baroness Chapman is expected to say that developing countries want to move from receiving aid money to an approach described as 'partnering, not paternalism', pointing to a deal between the Met Office and its Bangladeshi counterpart to improve flood forecasting. She will say: 'We need to support other countries' systems where this is what they want, so they can educate their children, reform their own healthcare systems and grow their economies in ways which last. 'And, ultimately, exit the need for aid. 'With less to spend, we have no choice. Biggest impact and biggest spend aren't always the same thing.'
The Guardian
08-05-2025
- Politics
- The Guardian
MPs seek assurances from UK equalities watchdog over gender ruling
A cross-party committee of MPs has written to the UK's equalities watchdog to seek assurances that its guidance on how organisations interpret the landmark supreme court ruling on gender issues does not ignore the needs of transgender people. The letter from the Commons women and equalities committee to Kishwer Falkner, the chair of the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), also urged her to extend the two-week timetable for people to submit views on how the EHRC's code of practice for organisations should work, saying this should be at least six weeks. It follows concern from transgender activists and a number of MPs that Falkner and her organisation have thus far taken an overly literal approach to last month's supreme court decision, which ruled that 'woman' in the Equality Act refers only to a biological woman. Immediately after the judgment, Falkner said the ruling meant only biological women could use single-sex changing rooms and women's toilets, or participate in women-only sporting events and teams, or be placed in women's wards in hospitals. Interim guidance from the EHRC set this out more formally, saying also that in some circumstances, transgender men, who were born as women, should not be able to use male toilets, while adding that trans people 'should not be put in a position where there are no facilities for them to use'. While ministers have welcome what they called the 'clarity' of the ruling and guidance, a number of MPs have raised worries about the implications for transgender people, for example whether people who had lived as women for decades would suddenly have to start using men's toilets. Sarah Owen, the Labour MP who chairs the women and equalities committee, has said many transgender people were 'anxious and unsure about where this ruling leaves them'. The letter, sent on behalf of the whole committee, asks Falkner to give information on a number of points, including: 'What steps the EHRC will be taking to ensure that the code of practice is supportive of the rights of all people (as noted in the supreme court judgment).' It also asks 'whether the code of practice will clarify rights of trans people, for example around strip-searching by police officers?'. In the wake of the ruling, the British Transport Police said it had updated its policy so that searches in custody would be conducted 'in accordance with the biological birth sex of the detainee', meaning that trans women will in future be strip-searched by male officers. On the two-week timetable for the consultation, the committee asked: 'What the reasoning was on deciding on a two-week consultation period and how that consultation will work in practice, for example will the EHRC proactively seek input from any particular groups or stakeholders? 'As a committee, we feel that at least six weeks minimum would be more appropriate to allow all stakeholders, including individuals, charities and disability groups, businesses, health providers and local authorities to contribute.' The letter also asks Falkner to set out what advice is being given to organisations who raise queries prior to the new code being available, and when it would be finalised. It also notes that the ruling meant there 'may be legal implications beyond the scope of the issues considered by the supreme court', asking if the EHRC will accept submissions on these. The EHRC was contacted for comment.
