Superintelligent AI Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateLord Stevenson of Balmacara
Main Page: Lord Stevenson of Balmacara (Labour - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Stevenson of Balmacara's debates with the Department for Business and Trade
(1 day, 10 hours ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I congratulate my noble friend Lord Hunt on securing this important debate and concealing the real purpose of it in a rather confusing title. I also want to declare that this speech was made entirely by myself and my brain, and I have not consulted any other agency, alive or automatic.
I hope that, when the Minister responds, she will confirm that the Government have no plan to suppress the development of ASI. Inquiry and discovery are deeply ingrained in the human psyche and the AI revolution we are living through should certainly not be suppressed. As we know, however, AI is already disrupting traditional media ecosystems and current regulatory arrangements are struggling. How are we going to regulate AI? That is the key question.
Ofcom is currently the regulator for online activity. As the Minister will be aware from recent questions and debates in this House, there are now real doubts about whether it can deliver on its current obligations, let alone take on ASI once it is in full flow. There are three issues in play here. Many of us feel that Ofcom has yet to meet the high expectations for change that were legislated for in the world-leading Online Safety Act. This is partly a structural issue, because Ofcom has to develop and then operate through codes of conduct, which do not have the authority of primary legislation, so take too long to develop and are often subject to legal challenge, or the fear of it. Ofcom already has enough on its plate with a wide range of pressing issues to deal with. It is hard to see how it can develop the bandwidth to scale up to the problems that ASI will bring. The new regulatory structure will have to deal with transnational companies and there seems to be little chance of seeing an international agreement on the approach to be taken, let alone having a body with powers to enforce decisions. So, what can be done?
I am grateful to the Centre for Regulation of the Creative Economy at Glasgow University for recent discussions on this and related topics. I refer the Minister in particular to its recent publication, which touches on how AI might fit into the UK’s current and future regulatory picture. Ofcom, for example, has established with the FCA, the CMA and the ICO, the Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum. Some of that work addresses questions posed by AI, but the DRCF has no statutory backing, no requirement on the partners to work together and no sharing of powers when action is required. Its role seems to be more of a kind of think tank. It undoubtedly does some good in sharing best practice, capacity building and the pursuit of international networking, but we will need much more than “adding value” to establish modes of regulation as AGI or ASI develops.
When the Minister comes to respond to the debate, I hope she can say a little more about how the Government intend to regulate in this area, building on the AI Security Institute and supporting the pro-growth agenda.