Public Authority Algorithmic and Automated Decision-Making Systems Bill [HL] Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateBaroness Lane-Fox of Soho
Main Page: Baroness Lane-Fox of Soho (Crossbench - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Baroness Lane-Fox of Soho's debates with the Department for Business and Trade
(1 week, 2 days ago)
Lords ChamberMy Lords, I declare my interests as stated in the register, most particularly as chair of the Government’s digital centre design panel.
It is appropriate that we are discussing this on Friday the 13th because, on looking into the engine of the Government’s AI plans, it is truly a horror show. The civil servants will not thank me for saying this but—surprise, surprise—they are not keen on regulation when they feel that mandating is quite sufficient. I have some sympathy, but I have more for the noble Lord’s Bill. It is vital that we look at these issues now. I hope that, whether through this Private Member’s Bill, the data Bill being considered on Monday—which, unfortunately, I am unable to contribute to—or other mechanisms, we take seriously this incredible push to a world of AI-powered public services, while trying to stand on the shoulders of what is still a very complex and broken public technology infrastructure.
I would like to make three points that I hope will be helpful in any context, the first of which is on procurement. When we started the Government Digital Service in 2010, we had procurement as priority number 5. As noble Lords will appreciate, getting beyond priority number 1 was a bit of a battle so we did not reach priority number 5. I wish that we had. I hope that the Minister, whether through this Bill or through other opportunities, will not underestimate the power of the grip of procurement on this issue. It is not transparent. The skills on the digital procurement side of the Civil Service are under-egged, and the deals done with suppliers are far from ideal as we move to a world in which we want to encourage innovation but must also encourage safety. I very much hope that procurement will be positioned very closely at the heart of any future plans.
Secondly, I take some guidance from what happened in Canada, which I am sure my noble friend Lord Clement-Jones—I will call him that—is aware of. Canada has also been trying to move to greater regulation of algorithmic transparency, and, as I understand it, the implementation has been very heavy and difficult. It has been resource-intensive, and extreme upskilling was needed to get this done without too much bureaucracy, while doing the job it was intended to do. I urge my noble friend and the Government to think very carefully about implementation. It is very important that we do not add to bureaucracy, at a time when we should be trying to pin it down.
Finally, although noble Lords will be bored of hearing me say this in this Chamber, it is impossible to describe the level of upskilling we need in the Civil Service over the next decade. This Bill highlights one aspect of the problem, but it is fundamental that we put at the heart of any plans for Civil Service reform an enormous increase in understanding of this new world in which we live.