The comments come as the Commission responds to the government’s AI white paper, which was published in March of this year and sets out a framework with guiding principles for existing regulators to manage and oversee the rapidly developing technology.

While the watchdog broadly agrees with a principle-based framework for regulating AI, it says that a greater focus on human rights and equality — alongside much greater funding for its regulators like itself — is urgently needed for the effective and efficient managing of AI’s potential.

If these suggested measures don’t materialise, the EHRC’s Chairwoman, Baroness Kishwer Falkner, has said that “the equality risks associated with AI will continue unchecked.”

Upon the publishing of EHRC’s response, Baroness Falkner said: “We welcome the government’s focus on safe and responsible AI development, including the need for fairness in the way AI is implemented. But the proposed regulations do not go far enough.

“People want the benefits of new technology but also need safety nets to protect them from the risks posed by unchecked AI advancement.

“If any new technology is to bring innovation while keeping us safe, it needs careful oversight. This includes oversight to ensure that AI does not worsen existing biases in society or lead to new discrimination.

“To rise to this challenge, we need to boost our capability and scale up our operation as a regulator of equality and human rights. We cannot do that without government funding.”

The EHRC’s full, 23-page response points out that regulators are perhaps best placed to address AI’s challenges and support its responsible usage and growth, not least due to regulators’ subject and sector expertise in addition to existing industry links — but only with the appropriate funding in place.

“We are ambitious for the role the EHRC can play in ensuring AI safely protects equality and human rights,” said Baroness Falkner. “We are already collaborating with other regulatory bodies to achieve this goal.

“As AI technology continues to advance at an unprecedented pace, we must strike the right balance between innovation to improve public services and UK businesses, and the safeguarding of human rights and equality for everyone in Britain, as enshrined in law.”

Recommended

• How MadeBrave is Fostering Creativity in a Post-Pandemic Workforce
• Users Want More Fact-checking From Social Media Networks
• Heriot-Watt Developing AI-powered, Robotic Fishing Net

The EHRC isn’t the first regulatory body to respond on the UK Government’s proposed plans for AI regulation.

For instance, in April, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) said that it welcomed the government’s intention to convene regulators, but sought greater clarity on the respective roles of government and regulators when it comes to issuing guidance and advice.

At the beginning of this month, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) published its initial response to the AI white paper, suggesting that they see the benefits of a pro-innovation, proportionate, trustworthy, adaptable, clear, and collaborative framework.

However, also in early June, Richard Lochhead, the Scottish Government Minister for Small Business, Trade, and Innovation voiced his concerns at the Chamber over the UK’s “hands-off” plans, suggesting that it could impact Scotland’s ability to effectively manage both AI’s potential and risks.

“We are a bit concerned that the current UK government plans for the hands-off, non-statutory regulation of AI will not meet Scotland’s needs,” he said. “We don’t want to create unnecessary red tape, but we do have a duty to create the right supportive environment for business to thrive, and also for citizens to be protected.”

The UK Government’s AI white paper itself was launched all while an open letter which called for a moratorium on AI development was gaining significant traction, receiving support from other 1,000 tech leaders, including Steve Wozniak, the Apple co-founder, and Tristan Harris of the Center for Humane Technology.