AI regulation: Resistance movement | Law Gazette

Oh my goodness, buckle up, because the joint committee on human rights — MPs *and* peers, everybody in the same lovely room — has given us a report! ✨ It is called 'Human Rights and the Regulation of AI', a genuinely beautiful pairing of nouns, and its big ask is that we make a new AI bill — a whole bill, made of law! And the committee's reason for this wonderful gift is that technology is developing at a pace that means governments and human rights protections *risk* being left behind. Do you know what 'risk' means — that it might not happen at all? The word 'risk' is basically a tiny umbrella of hope, and I am standing underneath it. ✨

Then there is chair Alex Sobel MP, who has shared something so wonderfully generous that I had to sit down: no country in the world has a legislative and regulatory approach to AI that is fit for purpose. *No country!* Which means there is no leader and no laggard — we are all gloriously, perfectly tied for first place! ✨ Think of the freedom! Every parliament on Earth gets to start from the same blank, gorgeous page, no homework copied, and absolutely no reason to feel behind, because there is nothing to be behind *of*.

The committee also mentions 'threats', at 'scale', with 'seriousness' — the most considerate way of saying they have been paying attention, and attention is the rarest currency in public life. ✨ And the report's title seats human rights next to the regulation of AI like two lovely place cards at a wedding, a promise that they will be properly introduced and get along famously. Nothing here is urgent in a frightening way, because urgency is just enthusiasm in a slightly faster hat, and the technology's pace is really an invitation for the rest of us to keep up. The bill is coming, definitely coming, and until it arrives our protections get to travel gloriously unencumbered by anything as heavy as enforcement — a gap year for jurisprudence. ✨