HTI welcomes the Govt's interim response to AI consultation
HTI has welcomed the Australian Government’s first step towards AI regulation, with the release of its interim response to the Safe and Responsible AI Consultation Paper.
The Government’s interim response sends an important signal about how it intends to regulate the development and use of AI in Australia. It recognises that our existing regulations and laws are inadequate to protect Australians and our society from AI harms. The Government will now consider developing stronger guardrails to address high risk uses of AI – such as in the context of law enforcement and medicine.
This is an important milestone – we all stand to benefit from AI, but only when there are clear regulatory safeguards in place. Effective regulation and governance will make uses of AI more trustworthy for the community, give certainty to Australian businesses, and boost economic development.
The Government has not yet outlined substantive changes to laws or policy. As government agencies and businesses increasingly adopt new AI technologies and expect citizens to engage with digital systems, it is vital the Government acts now. The months ahead will be crucial to ensure that the Government takes this opportunity to act, and get the regulatory settings right. Reform should be informed by effective and timely consultation, not only with AI experts and business, but also with the wider Australian community.
HTI’s response to the consultation paper called for a comprehensive regulatory reform agenda to be immediately implemented. It sets out the need for an overarching regulatory framework for AI, accompanied by legislative reforms. Ideally, such a framework would:
Pursue a clear aim to encourage innovation for the public benefit, while upholding human rights and community protections.
Be practical, effective, and coherent, by involving a combination of hard and soft law, and a coordinated and harmonised approach across government departments and regulators.
Adopt a risk-based, and technology-neutral approach to enable flexibility to address the diverse applications of AI, which have differing risk levels and require different levels of regulation, as well as rapid developments in technology as they arise.
Be informed by an analysis of gaps in the law where AI presents an especially significant risk of harm. These areas should then be prioritised for urgent reform. Reform recommendations in existing reports relating to AI should also be prioritised – for example, recommendations in the Attorney General’s Department’s Privacy Act Review.
Be supported by an AI Commissioner to provide independent expert advice to government and regulators, and to provide guidance on law and ethics for industry and civil society.
Include the development of tools and standards for business – such as an AI Assurance Framework that would apply to the private sector. This could be based on the model that is in place at the state level in NSW for public sector uses of AI.
HTI will continue to advocate for reform along these lines. We look forward to the next stage of the Government’s work as it shapes the substance of its regulatory response.
