Asked by: Bambos Charalambous (Labour - Enfield, Southgate)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment she has made of the potential merits of the allocation of UK Sport funding to (a) deaf athletes and (b) the Deaflympics.
Answered by Stuart Andrew - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
UK Sport uses funding provided by the Government to support athletes with potential to achieve success in Olympic and Paralympic sports. As the Deaflympics falls outside of Olympic and Paralympic sport, UK Sport are therefore unable to fund athletes targeting this event.
This is in line with the Government’s approach to other Paralympic sports where competition is not offered in an athlete's particular classification or discipline.
Sport England has committed £1.2 million between 2022 and 2027 to UK Deaf Sport to boost deaf sport at the grassroots level and build wider participation. They have also agreed to explore a series of small-scale talent pilots for d/Deaf athletes. These pilots will see Sport England, National Governing Bodies, and UK Deaf Sport working together to explore these issues and suggest potential solutions.
d/Deaf athletes do receive Government funding. Sport England has committed £1.2 million between 2022 and 2027 to UK Deaf Sport to boost deaf sport at the grassroots level and build wider participation. Beyond this, they have also agreed to explore a series of small-scale talent pilots for d/Deaf athletes. These pilots will see Sport England, National Governing Bodies, and UK Deaf Sport working together to explore support around elite competitions and suggest potential solutions.
Asked by: Bambos Charalambous (Labour - Enfield, Southgate)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, whether her Department has carried out an equality impact assessment of the elite sport funding of deaf people.
Answered by Stuart Andrew - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Culture, Media and Sport)
UK Sport uses funding provided by the Government to support athletes with potential to achieve success in Olympic and Paralympic sports. As the Deaflympics falls outside of Olympic and Paralympic sport, UK Sport are therefore unable to fund athletes targeting this event.
This is in line with the Government’s approach to other Paralympic sports where competition is not offered in an athlete's particular classification or discipline.
Sport England has committed £1.2 million between 2022 and 2027 to UK Deaf Sport to boost deaf sport at the grassroots level and build wider participation. They have also agreed to explore a series of small-scale talent pilots for d/Deaf athletes. These pilots will see Sport England, National Governing Bodies, and UK Deaf Sport working together to explore these issues and suggest potential solutions.
d/Deaf athletes do receive Government funding. Sport England has committed £1.2 million between 2022 and 2027 to UK Deaf Sport to boost deaf sport at the grassroots level and build wider participation. Beyond this, they have also agreed to explore a series of small-scale talent pilots for d/Deaf athletes. These pilots will see Sport England, National Governing Bodies, and UK Deaf Sport working together to explore support around elite competitions and suggest potential solutions.
Asked by: Bambos Charalambous (Labour - Enfield, Southgate)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, what progress the Government is making on the establishment of the £500 million Youth Investment Fund announced by the Chancellor in September 2019.
Answered by John Whittingdale
The Youth Investment Fund (YIF) remains a manifesto commitment for levelling up across England over the course of the parliament. In the recently announced Spending Review, £30m of this was committed as capital investment for 2021-22. This will provide investment for new and refurbished safe spaces for young people, so they can access support from youth workers, and positive activities out of school, including sport and culture. Further details of the timetable for allocation of YIF funding in 2021-22, and how the funding will be distributed will be announced in due course.
The department is currently undertaking a review of all DCMS spending on services for young people, including future plans for the Youth Investment Fund, which we anticipate will conclude in May this year.
Government recognises the significant impact of Covid-19 on young people, particularly the most vulnerable, and on the youth services that support them. The £16.5m Youth Covid-19 Support Fund was announced to protect the immediate future of grassroots and national youth organisations across the country. The fund opened for applications on 15 January 2021 and closed 19 February 2021.
Asked by: Bambos Charalambous (Labour - Enfield, Southgate)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, what support he is providing to ensure UK-based academics can access adequate computer technology to carry out effective research on artificial intelligence.
Answered by John Whittingdale
Historically, UKRI councils have advocated for responsible research and innovation approaches. EPSRC has advocated and established a flexible and proportionate approach for its community (and staff) to consider what Responsible Innovation means for their activities. The development of the AREA framework was introduced in 2013. This encourages everyone involved in the research to describe and analyse possible impacts that may arise from their research activities, reflect on what that may mean going forward, openly engage with others, and to use these processes to influence the direction and trajectory of the research.
Within the UK, there are a number of activities and initiatives around responsible research and innovation in AI and providing leadership in this space. Examples include the Ada Lovelace Institute, The Alan Turing Institute, The Observatory for Responsible Research and Innovation in ICT (ORBIT).
UKRI is making investments in research to understand and implement the properties of Trustworthy AI across all applications of AI but this is a relatively new research area in which still further research is needed. Responsible, trustworthy AI is also a consistent theme in the investigations and strategic approaches of key UK and international stakeholders. For example, the G20 AI Principles and OECD Recommendations on AI focus on Responsible AI as a key theme for international AI development going forward. Through the Royal Society’s report ‘Machine Learning: The Power and Promise of Computers that Learn by Example’ the breadth of the responsibility challenge was illustrated, with clear current public concerns and barriers to adoption discussed as well as opportunities if fully Responsible AI is adopted.
Asked by: Bambos Charalambous (Labour - Enfield, Southgate)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, what plans his Department has to support good governance and ethical considerations at institutions carrying out artificial intelligence research.
Answered by John Whittingdale
Historically, UKRI councils have advocated for responsible research and innovation approaches. EPSRC has advocated and established a flexible and proportionate approach for its community (and staff) to consider what Responsible Innovation means for their activities. The development of the AREA framework was introduced in 2013. This encourages everyone involved in the research to describe and analyse possible impacts that may arise from their research activities, reflect on what that may mean going forward, openly engage with others, and to use these processes to influence the direction and trajectory of the research.
Within the UK, there are a number of activities and initiatives around responsible research and innovation in AI and providing leadership in this space. Examples include the Ada Lovelace Institute, The Alan Turing Institute, The Observatory for Responsible Research and Innovation in ICT (ORBIT).
UKRI is making investments in research to understand and implement the properties of Trustworthy AI across all applications of AI but this is a relatively new research area in which still further research is needed. Responsible, trustworthy AI is also a consistent theme in the investigations and strategic approaches of key UK and international stakeholders. For example, the G20 AI Principles and OECD Recommendations on AI focus on Responsible AI as a key theme for international AI development going forward. Through the Royal Society’s report ‘Machine Learning: The Power and Promise of Computers that Learn by Example’ the breadth of the responsibility challenge was illustrated, with clear current public concerns and barriers to adoption discussed as well as opportunities if fully Responsible AI is adopted.
Asked by: Bambos Charalambous (Labour - Enfield, Southgate)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, what plans her Department has to ensure (a) lines of accountability and (b) attributable liability for mistakes of artificial intelligence services.
Answered by John Whittingdale
Our future work related to attributable liability for mistakes of artificial intelligence services will be informed by independent expert advice. As part of its current work programme, the Centre for Data Ethics and Innovation is conducting a review into the potential for bias in the use of algorithms and will publish its report in March 2020.
Other measures include promoting a more ethical use of data within government. For example, one of the seven principles of the UK’s Data Ethics Framework is transparency about the tools, data and algorithms used to conduct work to enable greater scrutiny. The Framework encourages sharing models for algorithmic accountability and making data science tools available for scrutiny wherever possible.
Moreover, the Data Protection Act introduced the necessary safeguards such as the right to be informed of automated processing as soon as possible and the right to challenge an automated decision made by a data controller or processor.