PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
Creative Copyright - 16 October 2025 (Commons/Commons Chamber)

The Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology and I have been working with representatives from the creative industries and major tech companies to ensure that we have a copyright regime that is fit for purpose. But our message is clear, to speak directly to the hon. Member’s concern and that of many other Members of this House: if it does not work for creatives, it will not work for us, and we will not do it.

Daisy May Johnson is an exceptionally talented author of children’s books in York, but her work has been scraped and reproduced by generative artificial intelligence. She has not given permission and has not received a penny, but she has lost thousands of pounds. The same can be said about artists, musicians, writers and other creatives. When the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 was going through this House, we were given a commitment that the Government would do more, so could the Minister set out what progress has been made and ensure that there is legislation on this in the next Session?

I really appreciate the urgency of this issue. The example of Daisy from the hon. Member’s constituency is similar to examples from many other Members. As a Labour Government, we obviously believe strongly that people must be fairly paid for their work, which is why we have put transparency and remuneration at the heart of the principles that will govern our approach. Like I said, we have made progress with the expert working group, and we will be able to announce the details shortly. We are also establishing a parliamentary working group, which I very much hope the hon. Member will participate in, to make sure that we hear the views of people from across the country through their MPs. I will be able to deliver a statement to the House by the end of this year on the future of the copyright framework.

The Government continue their haphazard approach to artificial intelligence and copyright. I wish they would get that resolved. One thing that has concerned and upset the sector was the comments of a newly appointed special adviser to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, who said,

“whether or not you philosophically believe the big AI firms should compensate content creators, they in practice will never legally have to”.

I am really hoping that the Secretary of State distances herself from those comments and that that is not the intention of her Government.

I am happy to give the hon. Gentleman that assurance: that is not the Government’s intention. He says that there has been a “haphazard approach”. Actually, no country in the world has yet managed to resolve this matter. We appreciate the urgency and we are determined to address this and become the gold standard. The creative industries are at the centre of our industrial strategy for a reason: because we know that they lead and light up the world. Whatever AI model develops in future, human, good-quality content will be at the heart of that. We have to and will protect it and I am happy to give him that assurance.