The Institute of Directors (IoD) have raised concerns that the UK risks being "left behind" with respect to artificial intelligence (AI) given its current approach in relation to AI regulation, with the risk that the EU approach could become the "de facto global standard" unless the UK "acts fast" to "create legal certainty" by establishing a "principles-based regime on a statutory basis".
UK AI Regulation
As we highlighted in a previous article, the Government published a White Paper back on the 29th March 2023 entitled, “A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation“. A consultation relating to that White Paper closed on the 21st June 2023, and the Government response to that consultation is awaited.
White Paper & Consultation
The White Paper proposes that UK AI regulation will be based upon proportionality, with the regulatory framework being determined by the industry and context in which the system is being deployed. Hence, if implemented, it would constitute a much more light-touch risk-based approach when compared to the prescriptive / standardized one set out by EU in its draft AI Act.
Accordingly, under these proposals, there would be no legislation and no regulator. Instead, existing sector regulators, such as the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), will apply the following 5 core principles to artificial intelligence systems operated within the area they have oversight over:-
- AI system must be safe, secure, and reliable
- Outcomes arising out of the operation of AI systems must be fair
- There must a right of redress when things go wrong
- Legal responsibility and accountability to ensure that those responsible for the output of AI systems are clearly defined, and that there is effective supervision of those systems.
- There must be transparency in the use of AI systems
Moreover, rather than defining what constitutes artificial intelligence, the focus instead would be on two core characteristics that the technology exhibits: its ability to adapt to its environment and its ability to make autonomous decisions. That is, regulation would apply to technology that displays these two characteristics.
Continuous Assessment
Furthermore, whilst acknowledging that there are risks associated with such a decentralised approach, it is also proposed that new functions are created within central Government to continuously assess the effectiveness of existing AI regulation, the monitoring of risks, public education, and “supporting testbeds and sandbox initiatives to help AI innovators get new technologies to market.“
Institute of Directors (IoD) Raise Concerns
Nevertheless, in a press release published on the 19th October 2023, the IoD have argued that legislation is required in the area of AI regulation in order to "establish a principles-based regime on a statutory basis" that would provide British businesses with the "legal certainty" and the confidence required to invest in and develop the technology. They contend that unless the Government "acts fast" in this regard, then there is a risk that the EU approach could become the "de facto global standard", with the UK "left behind".
Survey
The IoD found in a survey of its members that the current legal uncertainty in relation AI regulation has meant that:-
- Whilst 51% of respondents acknowledged that AI presents them with business opportunities (with just 23% of them of the view that it poses risks), just 8% have put "governance structures" in place so far to develop those opportunities
- 60% of respondents not only have boards that are devoid of anybody with any knowledge base relating to AI, but do not even consider it worthy of consideration at a boardroom level and have not even conducted any kind of evaluation as to the risks and opportunities it presents. That is, AI as a consideration and a business opportunity is not even on the radar as far as 60% of UK businesses are concerned.
Whilst the IoD are "broadly supportive" of the more light-touch approach being pursued by the UK Government in relation to AI regulation, compared to the more prescriptive / standardized approach of the EU, they believe that UK AI regulation does need to be enshrined in legislation (i.e. by "establish[ing] a principles-based regime on a statutory basis") to provide UK businesses with "legal certainty".
Comment
Commening upon the IoD's position, its Director of Policy, Dr. Roger Barker, stated: "clearly articulated regulatory principles for AI are essential to create legal certainty for business leaders...However, there is no time to waste. The EU’s proposed legislation is well advanced and may quickly establish itself as the de facto global standard for AI regulation."
Dr Barker added: "The UK is at risk of being left behind. In order to retain its position of leadership, the UK needs to act fast in implementing its own vision for AI regulation rather than waiting for others to set the rules of the game. We therefore urge the Government to place its AI regulatory principles on a statutory basis through legislation in the King’s Speech."
