The Secretary of State makes an important point about the balance that needs to be struck in these areas. He has given an example of the use of artificial intelligence being appropriate for the checking of documents, and work on dealing with disclosure parameters has already been successfully piloted by the Serious Fraud Office. Would he concede that there is a distinction to be drawn between those essentially transactional but important operations, such as disclosure searches, and the application of human judgment that should be brought to, for example, a charging decision by the SFO? Does he agree that any determination of the facts or issues of a case should clearly be done by a human judge, having heard the arguments, and that their workload could be slimmed down but not replaced by the use of AI?
Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Robert Neill
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 27 November 2018.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Courts and Tribunals (Judiciary and Functions of Staff) Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
650 c175 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2019-07-08 14:37:35 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-11-27/18112756000371
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-11-27/18112756000371
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2018-11-27/18112756000371