Select Committee · Science, Innovation and Technology Committee

Governance of artificial intelligence (AI)

Status: Closed Opened: 20 Oct 2022 Closed: 28 May 2024 17 recommendations 67 conclusions 2 reports

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) has increased significantly in recent years. It offers a range of potential benefits such as quicker analysis of large datasets allowing more accurate information, forecasts and predictions, and more personalised public services. However, there are a number of concerns, such as the possibility of biased algorithms, a lack of …

Clear

Reports

2 reports
Title HC No. Published Items Response
Third Report - Governance of artificial intelligence (AI) HC 38 28 May 2024 62 Responded
Ninth Report - The governance of artificial intelligence: i… HC 1769 31 Aug 2023 22 Responded

Recommendations & Conclusions

17 items
8 Conclusion Ninth Report - The governance of artifi… Acknowledged

Translating AI's wide potential into safe, sustainable reality poses a significant policy challenge.

The wide range of potential applications, and associated benefits, reflects the general- purpose nature of AI. As with previous technological innovations, the challenge for policymakers is translating this potential into reality, in a safe and sustainable way. (Paragraph 40) 36 The governance of artificial intelligence: interim report Twelve Challenges of …

Government response. The government acknowledges the challenges and states it will continue to assess the implications of AI developments, consider devolution impacts, and engage devolved administrations as its policy evolves, building on the existing AI regulation framework.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
9 Conclusion Ninth Report - The governance of artifi… Acknowledged

Address the twelve outlined AI governance challenges through domestic policy and international engagement.

The Government’s approach to AI governance and regulation should address each of the twelve challenges we have outlined, both through domestic policy and international engagement. (Paragraph 88) The Government approach to AI

Government response. The government agrees on the importance of AI governance and points to its AI Regulation White Paper, stating it will develop its approach in consultation and provide an update through its response to the White Paper consultation.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
10 Conclusion Ninth Report - The governance of artifi… Acknowledged

UK's initial AI regulatory approach risks falling behind the rapid pace of development.

The UK has a long history of technological innovation and regulatory expertise, which can help it forge a distinctive regulatory path on AI. The AI white paper should be welcomed as an initial effort to engage with a complex task. However, the approach outlined is already risking falling behind the …

Government response. The government agrees on the importance of an AI governance regime and has published its White Paper, emphasizing its intent not to rush legislation but to implement the right measures at the right time. They will provide an update through …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
17 Conclusion Ninth Report - The governance of artifi… Acknowledged

Utilise interim report challenges as basis for global AI safety summit discussions.

The Prime Minister was right to say that AI does not respect national borders, and we welcome the announcement of a global summit on AI safety in London. The challenges highlighted in our interim Report should form the basis for these important international discussions.

Government response. The government welcomes the Committee’s analysis, agreeing on the importance of addressing AI challenges through international action and engagement. It highlights the successful convening of the first AI Safety Summit, which aimed to advance a shared international understanding of AI …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
19 Conclusion Ninth Report - The governance of artifi… Acknowledged

Implement measures to safely harness AI benefits and provide credible protection from harm.

There is as little consensus about how AI will evolve as there has been excitement and hyperbole following its rise to ubiquity. AI cannot be un-invented. It has and will continue to change the way we live our lives. Humans must take measures to safely harness the benefits of the …

Government response. The government welcomes the Committee’s analysis and agrees on the need for effective domestic governance, regulation, and international engagement to ensure safe AI innovation and public trust. They have set out their principles-based approach in the AI Regulation White Paper …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
20 Conclusion Ninth Report - The governance of artifi… Acknowledged

Pausing AI development is not deliverable, yet new regulation remains essential.

Some observers have called for the development of certain types of AI models and tools to be paused, allowing global regulatory and governance frameworks to catch up. We are unconvinced that such a pause is deliverable. When AI leaders say that new regulation is essential, their calls cannot responsibly be …

Government response. The government agreed a governance regime for AI is vital and highlighted its March 2023 White Paper outlining a principles-based approach using existing regulators. It stated it will not rush to new legislation but will update its approach through its …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
21 Conclusion Ninth Report - The governance of artifi… Acknowledged

Address the twelve Challenges of AI Governance set out for policymakers.

The twelve Challenges of AI Governance which we have set out must be addressed by policymakers in all jurisdictions. Different administrations may choose different ways to do this. (Paragraph 123) 38 The governance of artificial intelligence: interim report

Government response. The government acknowledges the varied approaches to AI governance across jurisdictions and the imperative for international interoperability, noting its own AI regulation framework applies to the whole UK. They will continue to assess implications and engage devolved administrations.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
18 Recommendation Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

Confirm i.AI public sector pilot list, selection criteria, evaluation, and future plans.

In its response to this Report, the Government should confirm the full list of public sector pilots currently being led or supported by i.AI, the criteria that determined i.AI pilot project selections, how it intends to evaluate their success and decide whether to roll them out more widely, and what …

Government response. The government lists several i.AI pilot projects such as 'Caddy' and 'Redbox', directing to the i.AI website for further details. However, it does not provide the specific selection criteria, evaluation methods, or plans for other pilots as requested in the …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
20 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

Extend Algorithmic Transparency Standard to all public bodies from January 2025.

The requirement for Government departments to use the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard should be extended to all public bodies sponsored by Government departments, from 1 January 2025. (Paragraph 77) The AI Safety Institute

Government response. The government has made the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) mandatory for central government departments and a priority group of 85 arm’s-length bodies. It states an intent to extend it to the broader public sector over time and will continue …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
22 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

Continue empowering AI Safety Institute to recruit necessary talent for its mission.

The next Government should continue to empower the Institute to recruit the talent it needs.

Government response. The government intends to put the AI Safety Institute (AISI) on a statutory footing, which it believes would strengthen its role. However, the response does not provide specific details on how it will continue to empower the Institute to recruit …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
27 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

US and EU pursue distinct AI governance for competitive regulatory advantage.

In our interim Report we highlighted moves by both the United States and European Union to develop their own approaches to AI governance. The subsequent White House Executive Order and the EU AI Act are clear attempts to secure competitive regulatory advantage.

Government response. The government reiterates its commitment to making the UK a world leader in AI and states it will continue to engage closely with international partners as it further develops its approach to AI governance, including legislative proposals.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
28 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

UK's distinct AI approach significant despite potential US and EU regulatory effects.

It is true that the size of both the United States and European Union markets may mean that ‘the Washington effect’ and ‘Brussels effect’—referring to the de facto standardising of global regulatory approaches, potentially to the detriment of the UK’s distinct approach—will apply to AI governance. Nevertheless, the distinctiveness of …

Government response. The government reaffirmed its commitment to making the UK a world leader in AI and will continue to engage with international partners, including the US and EU, to develop its AI governance approach and legislative proposals. It highlighted its ongoing …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
29 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

US and EU AI governance approaches reveal downsides in scope and implementation.

Both the US and EU approaches to AI governance have their downsides. The scope of the former only imposes a requirement on Federal bodies and relies on voluntary commitments from leading developers. The latter has been criticised for its top- down, prescriptive approach and the potential for uneven implementation across …

Government response. The government did not directly address the committee's specific observations on the downsides of US and EU AI governance. Instead, it reiterated its commitment to making the UK an AI leader, continuing international engagement, and developing its own AI governance …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
30 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

Apply lessons learned from other jurisdictions to UK's distinct AI governance approach.

The UK is entitled to pursue an approach that considers developments in other jurisdictions but does not unthinkingly replicate them. However, where there are lessons to be learned from other jurisdictions, the next Government should be willing to apply them.

Government response. The government stated its commitment to continuing engagement with international partners, including the US and EU, to further develop its AI governance approach and legislative proposals, aligning with the principle of learning from other jurisdictions while maintaining a distinct UK …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
31 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

Continue international AI agenda and swiftly establish domestic framework addressing governance challenges.

The UK has a long history of encouraging technological innovation by offering a stable, expert regulatory environment coupled with clear industry standards. The current Government is therefore right to have encouraged the growth of a strong AI sector in the UK, engaged with leading developers through the AI Safety Institute …

Government response. The government affirmed its commitment to making the UK an AI leader, continuing its international agenda through summits and the AI Safety Institute, and engaging with partners to develop its AI governance approach and legislative proposals, broadly aligning with the …
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
48 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

Prioritise testing and verifying AI model outputs while investigating their decision-making processes.

The regulators charged with implementing the Government’s high-level AI governance principles should, in their approach to these models and tools, prioritise testing and verifying their outputs, as well seeking to establish—whilst accepting the difficulty of doing so with absolute certainty—how they arrived at them.

Government response. The government provided a general statement committing to defending AI openness, supporting the open-source ecosystem, and taking steps to improve AI safety, but did not detail specific actions or priorities for regulators regarding testing and verifying AI outputs.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology
49 Conclusion Third Report - Governance of artificial… Acknowledged

AI marketplace requires diversity to support both open and closed-source models.

The open-source approach has underpinned many technological breakthroughs, including the Internet and AI. Whilst some providers of products and services, such as AI models and their applications, will want to keep elements of their offerings proprietary, a healthy AI marketplace should be sufficiently diverse to support both ‘open’ and ‘closed’ …

Government response. The government expresses commitment to defending the importance of openness and supporting the UK’s open-source ecosystem while also taking steps to improve AI safety.
Department for Science, Innovation and Technology

Oral evidence sessions

9 sessions
Date Witnesses
13 Dec 2023 Rt Hon Michelle Donelan · Department for Science, Innovation and Technology, Sarah Munby · Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy View ↗
8 Nov 2023 Emran Mian · Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, Matt Clifford · AI Safety Summit View ↗
25 Oct 2023 Dame Melanie Dawes · Ofcom, Jessica Rusu · Financial Conduct Authority, John Edwards · Information Commissioner's Office, Kate Jones · Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum, Will Hayter · Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) View ↗
24 May 2023 Dr Marion Oswald · The Alan Turing Institute and Northumbria University, Dr Tony Mansfield · National Physical Laboratory, Lindsey Chiswick · Metropolitan Police, Michael Birtwistle · Ada Lovelace Institute View ↗
10 May 2023 Coran Darling · DLA Piper, Dr Hayleigh Bosher · Brunel University, Jamie Njoku-Goodwin · UK Music, Paul Fleming · Equity View ↗
29 Mar 2023 Daisy Christodoulou · No More Marking, Dr Matthew Glanville · The International Baccalaureate, Joel Kenyon · Dormers Wells High School, Southall, London, Professor Rose Luckin · University College London View ↗
8 Mar 2023 Professor Andrew Hopkins · Exscientia, Professor Delmiro Fernandez-Reyes · University College London, Professor Mihaela van der Schaar · Cambridge Centre for AI in Medicine, Cambridge University View ↗
22 Feb 2023 Adrian Joseph · BT Group, Hugh Milward · Microsoft, Jen Gennai · Google, Professor Dame Wendy Hall · University of Southampton, Professor Sir Nigel Shadbolt · Jesus College, University of Oxford View ↗
25 Jan 2023 Dr Manish Patel · Jiva.ai, Michael Cohen · University of Oxford, Mrs Katherine Holden · techUK, Professor Michael Osborne · University of Oxford and Mind Foundry View ↗

Correspondence

2 letters
DateDirectionTitle
6 Dec 2023 Correspondence from to Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technolog…
16 Nov 2023 From cttee Letter to the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology relatin…