Proposals to protect the creative industries against artificial intelligence (AI) have been rejected by MPs, after parliament heard both sectors need to succeed to grow Britain’s economy.

As PA Media reports, Peter Kyle, the science secretary, pledged to set up a series of expert working groups to find a “workable way forward” for both industries, as he urged MPs to reject the Lords’ amendment.

Peers amended the data (use and access) bill by adding a commitment to introduce transparency requirements, aiming to ensure copyright holders are able to see when their work has been used and by who. Today MPs voted 195 to 124, majority 71 to disagree with the amendment, tabled by Beeban Kidron.

Speaking in the Commons, Kyle said:

Pitting one against the other is unnecessarily divisive and damages both.

The truth is that growing Britain’s economy needs both sectors to succeed and to prosper. Britain has to be the place where the creative industries, and every bit as much as AI companies, can invest, grow, are confident in their future prosperity, that is assured.

We have to become a country where our people can enjoy the benefits and the opportunities of both.

It is time to tone down the unnecessary rhetoric and, instead, recognise that the country needs to strike a balance between content and creativity, transparency and training, and recognition and reward.

That can’t be done by well-meaning, but ultimately imperfect, amendments to a bill that was never intended to do such a thing.

The issue of AI copyright needs properly considered and enforceable legislation, drafted with the inclusion, the involvement, and the experience of both creatives and technologists.

To that end, I can tell the house that I am now setting up a series of expert working groups to bring together people from both sectors, on transparency, on licensing and other technical standards to chart a workable way forward.

Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, has accused Keir Starmer of making “baseless and disgusting slurs”. Referring to what Starmer said at his press conference about Kemi Badenoch siding with China, Russia and Iran over the Chagos Islands deal (see 3.28pm), she said:

Keir Starmer is captured by the socialist mindset that anyone who disagrees with him or who cares about his appalling capitulation to Mauritius and abandonment of the Chagossian people, is in same league as Britain’s adversaries – the Ayatollahs of Iran, Vladimir Putin and President Xi.

Starmer has slandered the Chagossian community and he is so arrogant and out of touch with British values and the national interest that he has resorted to baseless and disgusting slurs – whilst he himself hands control of Chagos to a country that is actually cosying up with Russia and China.

Today is a day of shame for our country, and Keir Starmer and David Lammy are the chief architects of it.

Here are extracts from Keir Starmer’s opening statement at his press conference defending the Chagos Islands deal.

On US support for the deal

Almost everything we do from the base is in partnership with the US.

President Trump has welcomed the deal along with other allies, because they see the strategic importance of this base and that we cannot cede the ground to others who would seek to do us harm.

On the risk of the UK losing a legal case to Mauritius if it did not settle the sovereignty issue

If Mauritius took us to court again, which they certainly would have, the UK’s longstanding legal view is that we would not have a realistic prospect of success and would likely face provisional measures orders within a matter of weeks.

On why ignoring court defeats in international law would not be an option

This is not just about international law, it’s about the operation of the base, even if we choose to ignore judgments made against us, international organisations and other countries would act on them and that would undermine the operation of the base, causing us to lose this unique capability.

One example of this is the electromagnetic spectrum. Countries have the right to manage this spectrum as they wish within their borders, a right that’s recognised in regulations and overseen in the International Telecommunication Union.

The use of the spectrum is key to understand and anticipate those who seek to do us harm. If our right to control it is put into doubt, we would lose the first line of defence against other countries who wish to interfere and disrupt this capability, rendering it practically useless.

In addition, if we did not agree this deal the legal situation would mean that we would not be able to prevent China or any other nation setting up their own bases on the outer islands or carrying out joint exercises near our base, we would have to explain to you, the British people and to our allies, that we’d lost control of this vital asset.

No responsible government could let that happen. So, there’s no alternative but to act in Britain’s national interest.

On how the last Conservative government conceded the sovereignty issue

Other approaches to secure the base have been tried over the years and they have failed. Boris Johnson failed in his efforts to endlessly delay. Liz Truss then started the negotiation. We inherited a negotiation in which the principle of giving up UK sovereignty had already been conceded by the previous Tory government.

On why the cost is justified

Our deal has concluded those negotiations in the national interest. Now, there’s obviously a cost to maintaining such a valuable asset, we pay for other military bases, allies like the US and France do the same.

This cost is part and parcel of using Britain’s global reach to keep us safe at home and it will be less than the cost of running one aircraft carrier for a year.

Today’s agreement is the only way to maintain the base in the long term. There is no alternative. We will never gamble with national security. So, we have acted to secure our national interest, to strengthen our national security.

Starmer says deal protects the future of Diego Garcia 100 years. And there is an option too add another 40 years, he says.

The treaty covers not just Diego Garcia, but the outer islands of the Chagos Islands, he says. And it will allow the UK “to control what happens up to 100 nautical miles from the base”, he says.

Q: Will the US be contributing to the cost?

Starmer says Diego Garcia is vital to both the US and the UK.

Both countries make “huge use” of the base.

He says the US is paying the running costs of the base, which are “far greater” than the costs the UK is paying.

Q: Why do you say the deal will cost £3.4bn over 99 years when the £101m annual cost implies it would cost a lot more?

Starmer says £3.4bn is the net cost.

That is how the government accounts for it, he says.

He suggests, over time, with inflation, a different figure would apply.

But he says the net cost is the one used by government for public sector projects like this, and this is the figure used by the OBR too.

Starmer says no responsible PM would have put Diego Garcia at risk. Any person who would have done that (ie, any person who would not support this deal, he implies), “is not fit to be prime minister”.

Q: What do you say to people who ask how the government can find £100m a year for this deal, but not money to support people with disabilities?

Starmer says keeping the country safe and secure is the first duty of a prime minister.

Repeating the point made by John Healey earlier, Starmer says all the UK’s allies back this deal.

In favour are all of our allies, the US, Nato, five eyes, India. Against it – Russia, China, Iran and surprisingly, the leader of the opposition and Nigel Farage are in that column, alongside Russia, China and Iran, rather than in the column that has the UK and its allies.

At the press conference Starmer is now taking questions.

Q: How much will the deal cost?

Starmer says the average annual cost of the deal is £101m.

And, he says the net overall cost, over 99 years, amounts to £3.4bn.

(Quite how those figure add up is not clear. The PM does not explain.)

He says this is slightly less than the average annual cost of running an aircraft carrier – without the aircraft.

And he says the cost is similar to what allies like the US and France pay to hire bases.

Starmer says the injunction, in a way, was a good thing.

It means a court heard the argument, and approved the government’s right to go ahead with the deal.

The Chagos Islands deal will cost the government £101m per year, the goverment has said.

John Healey, the defence secretary, says without a sovereignty deal, the Diego Garcia base would have become inoperable.

That is why the PM has signed the sovereignty deal, he says.

Healey says the UK’s allies back the deal. But countries like China, Russia and Iran want the deal to fail, because they want the base to claim.