The latest shocking news is some MPs appear to be using AI to help write their speeches for the House of Commons.
Frankly, I’d be more shocked if they weren’t. The MPs we should be alarmed about are those who aren’t equipping themselves with the basic skills of the AI age. In a representative democracy we’re meant to be able to trust our MPs to make informed decisions on our behalf. In the latter half of 2025 we should be alarmed if they haven’t yet mastered the basics of using AI to better serve their constituents.
Over the next few years MPs must consider the impact of AI on every piece of legislation they vote on. AI will impact every aspect of society and the economy from health and education to defence and welfare. AI’s impact on the economy and society will be like the impact of the industrial revolution. Except it will be much bigger and much faster. MPs who don’t understand AI or grasp its importance are a threat to the future success of the United Kingdom.
Bank of England governor uses Microsoft Copilot
It’s not just MPs who are using AI to help write speeches as The Times has revealed that Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England, uses AI to help shorten and sharpen his speeches. The Bank of England has confirmed that Bailey uses Microsoft Copilot to help draft official speeches. The Times reports that Bailey uses Copilot as an editing tool, inputting the draft of a lengthy speech and asking the software to cut it down to the right length before delivering it.
This is an ideal use case for Microsoft Copilot as the draft speeches he inputs are protected by enterprise-grade security to ensure the data remains private. A reason to be alarmed would be if he used a free AI app where there is a risk of data being ingested into the large language model.
MPs and the governor of the Bank of England are meant to be leaders. One of the keys to the successful adoption of AI is that it is embraced and used by leadership and not just imposed on people. Bailey should be praised for exploring how AI can be used and demonstrating its benefits are not about replacing junior staff but improving the performance of everyone, even those at the top.
MPs using AI for speeches and casework
It is harder to assess how MPs are using AI. Labour MP Mike Reader was recently ‘exposed’ for using AI to help with casework for constituents. He subsequently wrote an excellent article for PoliticsHome explaining how he uses AI to help draft responses to the more than 500 emails he receives each week.
MPs already have office staff to deal with and manage thousands of pieces of casework every year. Using AI to improve the speed and quality of responses and help is something every MP’s office should be doing as they have a duty to do their best for constituents and can’t do so without the best tools. In 2025 not using AI to help constituents would be like forcing them to attend constituency advice surgeries in person and refusing to deal with telephone or email requests for help.
In the PoliticsHome article Reader also reveals he and his team often play “ChatGPT Bingo” to try and spot MPs using it in speeches in the House. “They have certain terms they use,” he says. “ChatGPT often thinks parliamentary speeches should start with ‘I rise to speak in support of…’ If you see someone say that, chances are they’ve probably written it with ChatGPT.”
Pimlico Journal has published a detailed statistical analysis using data from Hansard since 2007, showing a clear spike in use of certain terms and words since the launch of ChatGPT.
While no doubt AI plays a part I suspect human nature is also a factor. MPs and their staff are no different to the rest of us. They’ll be influenced by what they’ve heard or seen most recently. Their research is likely to surface the most recent speeches. The accusation of politicians plagiarising historical speeches. It has happened since time immemorial. This creates a vicious circle where AI writers and human writers feed off the style of each other.
The Times has published a scathing editorial saying “voters are unlikely to be impressed with the idea that their elected representatives are merely parroting the outpourings of a bot on the floor of the mother of parliaments.”
And indeed voters should be rightly concerned if their elected representatives are “merely parroting the outpourings of a bot” because that wouldn’t be an effective or ethical use of AI.
How to use AI to improve your speech
Using AI to write a whole speech would be a terrible way to use AI. There are multiple legitimate ways that MPs, or anyone making a speech, can use AI to improve the speech. Ethical and effective ways to use AI to help with speeches include:
Content development – Generating ideas and angles, identifying key points, sourcing relevant anecdotes, examples and quotes, structuring a coherent narrative with logical flow.
Editing and improvement – Adjusting the tone, checking for clarity and conciseness to remove unnecessary jargon, proofing and improving readability and accessibility. Checking for unconscious bias.
Practice and delivery – AI can enable you to practise a speech and receive questions in real time, providing analysis with feedback and tips for improvement. It can provide analytics on timing, delivery, clarity, use of filler words, pauses and more.
Localisation – AI can help adapt a speech to customise it for different audiences and stakeholders. It can provide virtual feedback on how it might be perceived and interpreted by different audiences.
In the case of speeches in the House of Commons or House of Lords AI could even be used to add “unnecessary jargon” by taking a good, clear, modern speech and adding some of the archaic language that parliamentary procedure still thinks is necessary.
Speaker of the House of Commons sets up AI steering group
The Times reports that Sir Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons Speaker, has set up a steering group to examine how AI tools can affect the work of MPs. He said: “AI can be good or AI can be bad. We do not want all the speeches being the same. We need to use AI to enhance parliament.”
This is a welcome development. Sir Lindsay Hoyle has developed a reputation amongst some as a traditionalist, compared to the more flamboyant and creative style of his predecessor. In reality, I believe Sir Lindsay Hoyle wants to maintain the authority of parliament while identifying how it can be constantly improved.
His AI steering group provides an opportunity to explore the essential role that AI needs to play in not just parliamentary procedure, but in the daily work of every MP. Hopefully it will recommend the need for an AI policy and training for MPs and their staff.
It isn’t at the same scale but it reminds me of 2015 and the Speaker’s Commission on Digital Democracy. The CIPR was asked to make an official submission and asked me to write a comprehensive best practice guide for MPs on how to use Twitter. It subsequently became part of the commission’s findings and recommendations and although out of date is still on parliament’s website.
MPs need an AI driving licence and ethical AI policy
For both MPs and the governor of the Bank of England it’s critical they have advice, training and support to use AI ethically and effectively, just as employees in any organisation need the same.
Giving employees powerful AI tools without teaching them how to use them safely and effectively is like giving them a company car when they don’t know how to drive. In fact it’s more like giving them a high performance sports car. Teaching them how to use AI is like teaching them how to drive so they can sit a test and obtain their AI driving licence.
AI training needs to be within a framework of effective AI governance. Organisations or companies using AI need to ensure they have a working generative AI policy providing guidance on how AI can be used safely and effectively so its use is trusted by stakeholders. The policy needs to cover a broad spectrum of issues including transparency, inclusivity, bias, fact-checking, sustainability, accessibility and fairness.
Is this article written by AI?
If you’re wondering if AI was used to write this article then the answer is no, it was written by me with a little help from AI. This is what AI was used for:
First draft was written by me and then checked by AI (Copilot) which made minor tweaks and corrections.
The image was generated using Google Gemini’s new Nano Banana image generator by asking it to add robot android MPs to a picture of an empty House of Commons chamber.
The deliberately clickbait headline was generated entirely by AI (Gemini) which also suggested these headlines:
The “Scandal” Angle:
- Are Your MPs Lying To You? The AI Speech Scandal They Don’t Want You To Know About.
- FAKE POLITICS: The Secret AI Tool MPs Are Using to Write Their Speeches EXPOSED.
- Is That Your MP Speaking, Or A Robot? The Shocking Truth Revealed.
The “You Won’t Believe” Angle:
- We Asked AI to Write a Politician’s Speech. You Won’t Believe What It Said.
- The One Thing MPs Are Using to Write Speeches in Seconds, And It Will Change Politics Forever.
The “Threat” Angle:
- Is Your MP About to Be Replaced by a Robot? The Answer May Terrify You.
- This Is The End of Authentic Politics as We Know It.
- Robot Uprising in Westminster: Are AI-Powered MPs a Threat to Democracy?
The main giveaway for all these is their use of American style capitalisation of every word, instead of British English sentence case headlines.
