Plans for sectoral, principles-based regulation of the use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems by businesses in the UK should be supplemented with a centralised framework that helps ensure there is a coordinated approach to AI governance, a business lobby group has said.
The Confederation of British Industry (CBI) said businesses welcome the UK government’s plans for the regulation of AI but warned of a risk of “regulatory overlap, fragmentation, and regulatory complexity” if the UK’s approach to regulation of AI is determined exclusively by sector regulators.
The CBI has set out potential solutions to this problem in a new paper on AI regulation and governance (8-page / 192KB PDF) in which it advocated the establishment of an “AI governance hub” whose aim should be to become “the one-stop shop for the AI governance needs of businesses, regulators, and consumers”.
The CBI’s paper addressed the UK government’s plans to establish a regulatory framework for AI that is flexible, risk-based and focused on the use of the AI rather than the technology itself. That approach would see regulators such as the Competition and Markets Authority, Information Commissioner’s Office and Financial Conduct Authority regulate AI use under their own respective regulatory remits but with reference to overarching cross-sectoral principles.
In a policy paper published last summer, which followed publication of the national AI strategy in 2021, the government proposed six initial overarching principles. They are: ensure that AI is used safely; ensure that AI is technically secure and functions as designed; make sure that AI is appropriately transparent and explainable; embed considerations of fairness into AI; define legal persons’ responsibility for AI governance; clarify routes to redress or contestability.
In its paper, the CBI called on the UK government to expand its list of overarching cross-sectoral principles to include a principle that recognises “the potential for AI to boost innovation and create sustainable growth in our economy”.
In its recommendation that the government establish a “centralised framework” to supplement its sectoral, principles-based approach to regulating use of AI, the CBI said an AI governance hub could act as a body that sits between sectors and regulators and helps to coordinate regulatory activity, and exist within government and feed into AI policymaking. However, it said the hub should not be placed on a statutory footing nor have enforcement powers.
The hub could also “provide a roadmap to help firms navigate the AI governance landscape, alongside a set of central resources including guidance and examples of best practice” – resources, it added, that could also help regulators in implementing the cross-sectoral principles.
Examples of centralised AI guidance that the hub could issue include guidance addressing core definitions relevant to AI, how regulators can determine and govern risk, and on issues of liability, the CBI said.
The AI governance hub could also establish a business forum to promote discussion of “cross-cutting issues with multiple regulators” and enable “concerns that otherwise lack an obvious relevant regulator” to be raised, it said.
The CBI also stressed the need for “international coordination and engagement” if the UK is to become a global leader in AI. Among other things, it said the work of the AI Standards Hub “will be a critical resource to coordinate UK involvement in standards-setting as they are developed, as well as business use of international standards”.
Technology law expert Sarah Cameron of Pinsent Masons, who sat on the working group that helped inform the recommendations made by the CBI in its paper, said: “The UK's signalled vertical approach with light touch horizontal principles is widely seen as the right one but it will require relentless focus on coordination, coherence and consistency.”
“The UK approach, however, is at odds with the approach taken by the EU with its AI Act, which creates a challenge for business in terms of navigation different approaches. How the US and major economies in Asia Pacific proceed will be significant in determining how AI regulation and governance evolve – if other countries maintain a more principles-based approach coupled with strong assurance and standards, this could mean EU influence over the global approach to AI governance and regulation is less than we have seen in respect of global data protection standards flowing from the EU GDPR,” she said.
The government is expected to set out its next steps for AI regulation before the end of March.
Contact an adviser
