Nearly two years after the UK government signaled its intent to legislate on artificial intelligence (AI) during its first King’s Speech in July 2024, little has materialized. The government stated it would “seek to establish the appropriate legislation to place requirements on those working to develop the most powerful artificial intelligence models,” yet as the end of the Parliamentary session looms, an AI bill remains absent.
Despite promises of a draft bill by the end of 2024 and a consultation that was expected last autumn, no concrete steps have been taken by the government. As we approach the next King’s Speech, scheduled for early May, it appears unlikely that any specific AI legislation will be presented. This delay comes at a time when the government acknowledges the need for primary legislation to address pressing issues related to AI, including frontier AI, intellectual property rights, and the regulation of AI chatbots.
In response to this legislative stagnation, a recent Parliamentary One-Pager (POP) has called for urgent cross-sector AI legislation in the UK. The author of the POP argues that the time for discussion has passed and that the government must clarify its position and vision for AI, moving swiftly to enact necessary legislation.
Effective governance isn’t a brake pedal – it’s how boards give companies strategic direction.
Erin Young, Institute of Directors
Critics argue the government is caught in a false choice between promoting innovation and implementing regulation. Erin Young from the Institute of Directors counters this notion, asserting that effective governance can actually facilitate strategic direction rather than hinder it. The fintech regulatory sandbox serves as a prime example where adaptive regulation has successfully spurred innovation, replicated across nearly 100 jurisdictions globally.
The disconnect between public sentiment and government action is evident. Research from the Ada Lovelace Institute indicates that the government’s current approach is increasingly out of touch with public views on AI regulation. While the government has identified crucial areas needing attention, it has yet to propose a comprehensive framework for cross-sector legislation, leading to a fragmented regulatory landscape.
Gaia Marcus from the Ada Lovelace Institute echoes concerns about a “wait-and-see” strategy, warning that it risks turning into a game of “whack-a-mole” as issues arise haphazardly across various sectors. Hannah Perry from think-tank Demos suggests that AI could form part of a new social contract between the state and citizens, but only if meaningful protections—like a declaration of digital rights—are established.
The gaps in regulatory oversight are glaring. Multiple regulators are tasked with managing various aspects of AI, yet many lack the requisite expertise. The Joint Committee on Human Rights recently heard from the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), the Information Commissioner’s Office, and Ofcom about the challenges posed by rapid technological advancements outpacing traditional regulatory frameworks. Concerns such as biased algorithms and inadequate oversight are exacerbated in sensitive sectors like policing and welfare.
Capacity constraints further complicate matters. The EHRC has operated on a frozen budget for over a decade, struggling to address the complexities of emerging technologies. Public opinion indicates a strong desire for an independent regulator, with 89% of those surveyed by the Ada Lovelace Institute in favor of such a measure, a key provision in the proposed AI regulation private member’s bill.
The case for a proactive legislative approach to AI is compelling. A fragmented, voluntary, and domain-specific strategy fails to harness the full potential of AI for economic, social, and psychological benefits. The public’s demand for comprehensive AI regulation is clear; a principles-based, outcomes-focused AI Bill is essential for a successful future. The government faces a pivotal decision: legislate effectively or risk losing the advantages that AI could bring. The forthcoming King’s Speech in May presents an opportunity to prioritize this issue, lest it be yet another missed chance for decisive action on AI governance.
See also
OpenAI’s Rogue AI Safeguards: Decoding the 2025 Safety Revolution
US AI Developments in 2025 Set Stage for 2026 Compliance Challenges and Strategies
Trump Drafts Executive Order to Block State AI Regulations, Centralizing Authority Under Federal Control
California Court Rules AI Misuse Heightens Lawyer’s Responsibilities in Noland Case
Policymakers Urged to Establish Comprehensive Regulations for AI in Mental Health
