Backbench Business Committee

Representations: Backbench Debates

Tuesday 20 October 2026

Ordered by the House of Commons to be published on 20 October 2026.

Watch the meeting

Members present: Bob Blackman (Chair); Jonathan Davies; Mary Glindon; Alison Hume; Martin Vickers.

Questions 1-10

Representations made

I: Peter Swallow

II: Iqbal Mohamed

Written evidence from witnesses:

– [Add names of witnesses and hyperlink to submissions]

Peter Swallow made representations.

Q1             Chair: Welcome to this meeting of the Backbench Business Committee, where we will be considering applications for debates in the Chamber and Westminster Hall. The first request is from Peter Swallow, and it is for a debate in the Chamber on International Men’s Day 2026. Peter, please present your case.

Peter Swallow: Thank you, Chair, for inviting me. I am on two Select Committees, and it is very strange being on this side of the horseshoe.

On 19 November, the UK will join over 80 countries in marking International Men’s Day. Last year saw the 10th annual House of Commons debate to mark that important occasion. I have come before you today to pitch that we continue that well-worn tradition, because the reality is that many of the challenges affecting men and boys in this country have not gone away. Those challenges include, in healthcare, the implementation of the men’s health strategy and the ongoing mental health crisis, which affects so many young boys and men; and in education, the importance of male role models in the face of often toxic social media influencers, and the attainment gaps that white working-class boys in particular face.

More positively, in business, we are seeing the effects of implementing day one paternity leave, which came into force in April, and we can scrutinise the ongoing Government review of parental leave. More broadly, we can look at the role that men play in addressing violence against women and girls. There is an opportunity here to have a positive conversation about the role that men play in building strong families and prosperous and resilient communities, while also reflecting on many of the real challenges. I hope you will grant this debate, so that we can continue what I think has been a really healthy and helpful tradition of spending a little bit of parliamentary time focusing on these really important issues.

Chair: Thank you very much.

Q2             Alison Hume: Thank you, Peter. The Committee has very little time allocated in the Chamber. Would you consider a Westminster Hall debate so that you could have your debate as close as possible to 19 November, or are you committed to the Chamber?

Peter Swallow: I of course accept the tensions that the Committee faces. I am sure you are used to people coming before you and saying, “I really want that Chamber debate, because I think that this is a very important issue and I would not want to see it sidelined.” But I recognise the challenges on your time, so if that is the Committee’s decision, of course I would understand. However, I do hope that we can get as many Members as possible to participate in this debate, especially on the back of last year’s very successful and well-attended debate.

Q3             Chair: International Men’s Day is 19 November, which would be the Thursday. That could coincide with when we have time to allocate. Would you want the debate on that day, or are there other events going on that might preclude the debate from happening that day?

Peter Swallow: I am just checking what I proposed in the application. Ideally, that would be the perfect day to do it, hopefully in the first debate of the day. If not, I appreciate those limitations. A Tuesday would also work in Westminster Hall, but my hope would definitely be for the stars to align and for it to fall on that date.

Chair: We do not yet know from the Leader of the House whether we will get that day in the Chamber, but we do know that we will have Westminster Hall that day, so that is why we are asking the question. Any other questions, colleagues? Okay, thank you very much, Peter. The Clerks will be in touch with you in due course.

Peter Swallow: Thank you very much.

Iqbal Mohamed made representations.

Q4             Chair: The second—and last—application is from Iqbal Mohamed, for a debate in the Chamber on the safety of frontier AI. Iqbal, over to you.

Iqbal Mohamed: Thank you, Chair, and thank you to the Backbench Business Committee for inviting me to share my reasons for applying for this debate.

Whether we want to or not, we cannot get away from AI. It is everywhere: on our screens, in our newspapers and on our feeds. In my mind, it is one of the greatest opportunities that humanity has ever had, but also one of the greatest risks.

I was the first Member of the House of Commons to secure a debate on AI safety, in Westminster Hall in December 2025. AI is moving at such a pace. In other policy areas, months or years might be enough time for Parliament to develop what society needs, but I think that we need to move a lot faster when it comes to AI.

The risks of AI are technical, societal and humanitarian. We have heard from the chief executives of those companies that there are existential risks to humanity from AI—between 10% and 25%. We have heard from Bill Gates that he expects AI to replace around 40% of all jobs in society. The risks are therefore not just technical or related to safety; they are societal and humanitarian as well. I attended an AI APPG evidence session yesterday evening that looked at AI machine-driven vehicles—robotaxis—and their potential impact on our society when we have 300,000 private hire drivers.

This is such a broad topic, and it demands real attention and time in the Chamber—and Members’ focus—so that we can work together towards delivering a regime, a regulatory framework, that does not impede the benefits and economic opportunities but also does not put our country or wider humanity at risk.

Just to add, I spent 25 years in pharmaceuticals—I am a regulatory compliance expert in the whole supply chain, from research to the marketing authorisation of pharmaceuticals—and I believe that the principles of pharma regulation could be applied to AI.

Chair: Thank you. I spent 12 years in regulatory compliance for BT, so I know about the markets.

Q5             Jonathan Davies: Thank you for bringing your application, Iqbal. You may have heard from the previous applicant’s pitch that there is quite a long waiting list for the Chamber. You have indicated that you want the debate to be there, but I would just suggest that sometimes time in the Chamber can be curtailed by urgent questions and statements. Would you consider a debate in Westminster Hall?

Iqbal Mohamed: Whatever is possible, I will accept. This is an important topic, and as long as parliamentarians have an opportunity to discuss it with the appropriate amount of time, that is definitely progress. Having had a debate in Westminster Hall last year, and given the speed at which AI is moving, I think that this demands more elevated attention. Having a debate in the main Chamber would hopefully give it that attention among parliamentarians, but also among the public and the media.

Jonathan Davies: So you would be happy to have it in Westminster Hall if it meant that you got it sooner?

Iqbal Mohamed: If that is the only option available, then absolutely; it is better than not having it.

Q6                Jonathan Davies: Would you be happy with a Tuesday or Thursday?

Iqbal Mohamed: Whichever day is available. I guess that Tuesday would be preferable, because more parliamentarians are normally on the estate.

Q7             Chair: Just so that you are clear, if it is a Tuesday, we have to allocate it when the appropriate Department is answering debates, so which Department would you expect to answer this one?

Iqbal Mohamed: It is DCMS now, I believe, with digital. I know that we have an AI Minister, but I do not know which Department he attaches himself to.

Martin Vickers: I thought that it was the Department for Business, Innovation, Science and Trade, or whatever they called it last week.

Alison Hume: DSIT is gone now.

Iqbal Mohamed: It is combined, now.

Chair: You might get the best of both worlds. Okay, thank you, Iqbal. The Clerks will be in touch with you in due course.

Iqbal Mohamed: Thank you very much. I really appreciate it.

Chair: That concludes the public business of the Committee. The Committee will now retire in private to consider the applications and the allocation of time.