Regulating AI: Lord Clement-Jones, the Lords, and the Future of Algorithmic Governance

Written by Archie Rankin

On Tuesday I attended KCL Liberal Democrats’ hosting of Lord Clement-Jones for a discussion on regulating AI. As the Liberal Democrat Lords Spokesperson for Science, Innovation, and Technology, and Co-Chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Artificial Intelligence, Lord Clement-Jones provided some unique insights on the regulatory landscape over the horizon.

This fantastic event took place against the backdrop of Lord Clement-Jones trailblazing in Parliament with his Public Authority Algorithmic and Automated Decision-Making Systems Bill, which passed its second reading in the House of Lords on the 13th of December last year. The Bill is part of Clement-Jones’ broader ambition of establishing an overarching regulatory framework for the use of AI in the public sector, and makes provisions for:

• Mandatory Algorithmic Impact Assessments (AIAs): Public authorities would be required to conduct AIAs prior to implementing any automated decision-making systems. These assessments are designed to identify and mitigate potential risks, such as bias or discrimination, ensuring decisions are fair, accurate, and transparent.
• Establishment of Transparency Standards: The bill mandates the creation of Algorithmic Transparency Records, which would be publicly accessible. These records must provide detailed information about the system's description, rationale for use, technical specifications, decision-making processes, and human oversight mechanisms.
• Continuous Monitoring and Evaluation: Public authorities are obligated to develop processes for ongoing monitoring of these systems to prevent unintended outcomes and ensure compliance with legal and ethical standards. This includes regular audits and evaluations to manage and mitigate associated risks.
• Independent Dispute Resolution Mechanism: The bill proposes the establishment of an independent service to handle challenges or appeals against decisions made by automated systems, ensuring individuals have access to redress mechanisms when adversely affected.

The Government have raised reservations about these provisions, arguing that they are already being covered by the existing the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) Hub. These reservations were expressed during the second reading by Baroness Maggie Jones, Under-Secretary of State at the Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology. Baroness Jones claimed the ATRS, in conjunction with the Government’s Data Use and Access Bill, addressed most of Clement-Jones’ concerns.

?You can read the second reading here.

Nevertheless, Lord Clement-Jones reminded the upper house and the government of the messy fiasco over the use of AI in grading A Level and GCSEs, resulting in many students missing out on university places. This is just one of many examples of the dangers of “unchecked algorithm systems”, he said, chief among which are lack of transparency and public trust in artificial intelligence.

Yesterday, the Bill went through its third and final reading in the House of Lords after which it was passed and sent the Commons. At the KCL event on Tuesday Lord Clement-Jones reminded the audience – constating of students, PhD researchers, and members of civil society and industry alike – that the passing of this Bill through the Lords is a courtesy extended to the noble Lord, and so we can expect a much tougher passage through the Commons.

You can read the third reading of the Bill here.

Nevertheless, Clement-Jones’ Public Authority Algorithmic and Automated Decision-Making Systems Bill is the first step to ensuring, as the Earl of Effingham (Cons.) ?noted yesterday whilst doubting the effectiveness of the Bill, “trustworthy artificial intelligence that garners public confidence, fosters innovation and contributes to economic growth.” ?This will be a space to watch, especially as the Government has recently published its AI Opportunities Action Plan for rapidly implementing AI in the public sector, which has ramification for everything from students’ grades to policing, council budgets to healthcare inequalities.

Looking outwards, my interest in Lord Clement-Jones’ Private Members Bill piqued when I got thinking of the idea of Lords reform. Once upon a time, I was opposed to the democratic reform of the upper chamber because, by and large, the Lords is a far better house of legislature than the performative, theatrical Commons. You can read all about what I used to think about the House of Lords over at The Fledger. ?The Public Authority Algorithmic and Automated Decision-Making Systems Bill, and the noble Lord to whose intellect it belongs, is a bright example of the virtue of a house of legislature made up of highly learned, expert lawmakers. Whether it will remain this way remains to be seen. What is coming faster over the horizon is the question of how we make a safe, effective regulatory framework for AI in the public sector.