Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Cabinet Office:
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, with reference to the Government's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in their Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period for which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on those issues in the latest period for which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by Alex Burghart - Parliamentary Secretary (Cabinet Office)
The AI White Paper emphasised the importance of ensuring that UK regulators and public bodies have the capacity, expertise, and capabilities to implement government’s pro-innovation approach whilst recognising and understanding the risks. This is particularly true for those regulators for which AI falls squarely within their regulatory remit, but also applies to a much wider range of public and regulatory bodies considering the implications AI has across the economy.
The Cabinet Office ALBs include 3 bodies that are either formally or informally classified as regulators:
The Civil Service Commission: The CSC are often referred to as a ‘regulator’ of recruitment into the Civil Service but undertake assurance/compliance work in respect of civil service recruitment only and are out of scope.
The UK Statistics Authority includes the Office of Statistics Regulation who set the statutory Code of Practice for Statistics and assess compliance with the Code. The Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR) utilises a regulator on a 0.33 FTE basis for their work providing guidance on how the principles in the Code of Practice for Statistics can help in designing, developing and using models to improve their trustworthiness, quality and value. Their guidance covers both traditional statistical techniques, such as linear regressions, and newer techniques, like machine learning, when they are used to create outputs that inform decision making or public policy. The OSR also regularly engages with other regulators on this topic through the attendance of workshops and working groups to ensure they remain aware and responsive to any developments in this space. The OSR does not plan to increase the time allocated to these issues. The promotion of the Code of Practice for Statistics into new areas of statistical analysis and data use has been a long-standing area of focus for the next year, and will continue to be, including in relation to AI (e.g. large language models).
The Equalities and Human Rights Commission: the Equalities Hub have provided a separate response on this PQ (188555) via the Rt Hon Kemi Badenoch MP, Minister for Equalities.
As part of the AI regulation White Paper consultation, we are engaging closely with regulators across the wider landscape and their sponsoring government departments to understand the organisational capacity they need to regulate AI effectively, across technical, regulatory, and market-specific expertise. This will inform our work to develop policy options with a view to addressing any gaps that emerge.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question
To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities, with reference to the Government's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in their Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period for which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on those issues in the latest period for which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by Maria Caulfield - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Business and Trade) (Minister for Women)
Cabinet Office’s Equality Hub sponsors the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC).
At the EHRC, between 20-25 people are spending part of their time considering how AI affects their area of focus. Excluding staffing costs, in the 2022-23, EHRC direct expenditure related to AI work was approximately £160k.
AI is a priority for the Equality and Human Rights Commission and is included in their strategic plan 2022 – 2025. The Commission is receiving a flat-cash settlement for 2023-2024, which, along with the wider public sector, means they will need to prioritise and will have limited flexibility within the year to increase resources available for work on AI.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Work and Pensions:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to the Government's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in their Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period for which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on those issues in the latest period for which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by Mims Davies - Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions)
The AI White Paper emphasised the importance of ensuring that UK regulators and public bodies have the capacity, expertise, and capabilities to implement government’s pro-innovation approach whilst recognising and understanding the risks. This is particularly true for those regulators for which AI falls squarely within their regulatory remit, but also applies to a much wider range of public and regulatory bodies considering the implications AI has across the economy.
The Department for Work and Pensions sponsors three regulators: The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR), the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and The Pensions Regulator. It is not possible to accurately confirm the numbers of staff who partly work on the implications of AI within their remit. This presents a challenge disaggregating ‘AI resource’ to provide figures on the proportion of budget spent. However, the department can confirm the following:
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, with reference to the Government's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in their Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period for which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on those issues in the latest period for which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by Andrew Griffith - Minister of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
The AI White Paper emphasised the importance of ensuring that UK regulators and public bodies have the capacity, expertise, and capabilities to implement government’s pro-innovation approach whilst recognising and understanding the risks. This is particularly true for those regulators for which AI falls squarely within their regulatory remit, but also applies to a much wider range of public and regulatory bodies considering the implications AI has across the economy, including the financial services regulators.
The Financial Conduct Authority, the Prudential Regulation Authority, the Bank of England in its regulation of certain financial market infrastructure, and the Payment Systems Regulator, are independent non-governmental bodies responsible for regulating and supervising the financial services industry. Although the Treasury sets the legal framework for the regulation of financial services, the regulators are responsible for developing and implementing rules, including relating to AI, and determining appropriate levels resourcing.
As part of the AI regulation White Paper consultation, the government is engaging closely with the regulators to understand the organisational capacity they need to regulate AI effectively, across technical, regulatory, and market-specific expertise.
I have asked the financial services regulators to respond to you directly on their resourcing for AI regulation.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, with reference to the Government's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in their Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period for which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on those issues in the latest period for which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by Mike Freer - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Ministry of Justice)
The AI White Paper emphasised the importance of ensuring that UK regulators and public bodies have the capacity, expertise, and capabilities to implement government’s pro-innovation approach whilst recognising and understanding the risks. This is particularly true for those regulators for which AI falls squarely within their regulatory remit, but also applies to a much wider range of public and regulatory bodies considering the implications AI has across the economy.
Legal services regulation is independent of Government and is overseen by the Legal Services Board (LSB) which is an Executive Non-Departmental Public Body of the MoJ. The LSB has a role to play in effectively regulating the use of AI. The LSB uses its resources flexibly to deliver the range of activities in its business plan. The LSB estimates that it deploys the equivalent of two policy and one research team members to work on technology and innovation, representing approximately £150,000 in staff costs and £50,000 in research annually. The LSB’s work on technology and innovation encompasses work on AI. The LSB continually assesses how best to deploy its resources to respond to emerging issues in a proportionate and effective way.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, with reference to the Government's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in their Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period for which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on those issues in the latest period for which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by Jesse Norman
The AI White Paper emphasised the importance of ensuring that UK regulators and public bodies have the capacity, expertise, and capabilities to implement government’s pro-innovation approach whilst recognising and understanding the risks. This is particularly true for those regulators for which AI falls squarely within their regulatory remit, but also applies to a much wider range of public and regulatory bodies considering the implications AI has across the economy.
The Department for Transport works with a number of regulators with responsibility for different modes of travel, from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency to the Civil Aviation Authority and Office of Rail and Road. As such, these regulators are responsible for overseeing the application of AI within their elements of the transport system and existing structures. Therefore, regulators do not all distinguish resource dedicated specifically to AI.
The Department is working closely with its regulators to ensure new and emerging applications of AI in transport are implemented safely and with effective regulation.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, with reference to her Department's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in her Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period of which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on these issues in the latest period of which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by Paul Scully
The AI White Paper emphasised the importance of ensuring that our regulators and public bodies have the capacity, expertise, and capabilities to implement our pro-innovation approach whilst recognising and understanding the risks. This is particularly true for those regulators for which AI falls squarely within their regulatory remit, but also applies to a much wider range of public and regulatory bodies considering the implications AI has across the economy.
The Department for Science, Innovation and Technology is the sponsoring department for the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), the Office for Communications (Ofcom), the Intellectual Property Office (IPO), and the Phone Paid Services Authority. Activity related to AI is carried out as part of wider activity that falls within each organisation’s remit, and this presents a challenge with disaggregating 'AI resource' in order to provide figures on the proportion of budget spent and staff working on AI regulation.
The ICO and Ofcom in particular have already taken significant steps to upskill themselves to understand new technologies and new business models, and develop and deploy new skills and regulatory tools. This includes their joint efforts via the Digital Regulation Cooperation Forum (DRCF) to develop their collective capabilities through knowledge exchange and joint work on cross-cutting topics. IPO continue to focus on AI reflecting the significant implications it has for areas falling within their remit - and are resourcing this work accordingly.
As part of the AI regulation White Paper consultation, we are engaging closely with regulators across the wider landscape and their sponsoring government departments to understand the organisational capacity they need to regulate AI effectively, across technical, regulatory, and market-specific expertise. This will inform our work to develop policy options with a view to addressing any gaps that emerge.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, whether the Department has made an assessment of audience support for Ofcom’s proposed revisions to the rules governing the quantity and scheduling of television advertising on public service channels.
Answered by John Whittingdale
Ofcom has a statutory duty to maintain standards in broadcast advertising, working in a co-regulatory partnership with the Advertising Standards Authority. Ofcom also has general duties under the Communications Act 2003 in relation to audience impact, including the plurality and diversity of television services.
This is therefore a matter for Ofcom as the independent regulator that administers the Code on the scheduling of television advertising.
Ofcom's consultation on proposed revisions to the rules governing the quantity and scheduling of television advertising on public service broadcasting channels was announced on 19 April and closed on 31 May. In their consultation document, Ofcom set out how it considers its proposals fit with its duties under the Communications Act 2003. Ofcom will publish their final decision after they have considered the responses and evidence, including on the impacts to audiences, as well as Public Service Broadcasters and other broadcasters.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what assessment she has made of the impact of Ofcom’s proposed revisions to the rules governing the quantity and scheduling of television advertising on public service channels on public service news.
Answered by John Whittingdale
Ofcom has a statutory duty to maintain standards in broadcast advertising, working in a co-regulatory partnership with the Advertising Standards Authority. Ofcom also has general duties under the Communications Act 2003 in relation to audience impact, including the plurality and diversity of television services.
This is therefore a matter for Ofcom as the independent regulator that administers the Code on the scheduling of television advertising.
Ofcom's consultation on proposed revisions to the rules governing the quantity and scheduling of television advertising on public service broadcasting channels was announced on 19 April and closed on 31 May. In their consultation document, Ofcom set out how it considers its proposals fit with its duties under the Communications Act 2003. Ofcom will publish their final decision after they have considered the responses and evidence, including on the impacts to audiences, as well as Public Service Broadcasters and other broadcasters.
Asked by: Lucy Powell (Labour (Co-op) - Manchester Central)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, with reference to the Government's publication A pro-innovation approach to AI regulation, published on 29 March 2023, how much and what proportion of the budget of each regulator in their Department was spent on regulation of artificial intelligence in the latest period for which information is available; how many staff in each regulator worked (a) wholly and (b) partly on those issues in the latest period for which information is available; and whether those regulators plan to increase resources for their work on artificial intelligence.
Answered by John Whittingdale
The Artificial Intelligence (AI) Regulation White Paper emphasised the importance of ensuring that UK regulators and public bodies have the capacity, expertise, and capabilities to implement the Government's pro-innovation approach whilst recognising and understanding the risks.
We are continuing to engage with regulators across the wider landscape to understand the organisational capacity needed to regulate AI effectively, which will inform our work to develop policy options.
However, due to difficulties in accurately disaggregating 'AI resource', we are not in a position to provide figures on the proportion of budget spent and staff working on AI regulation.