This is one point—and a concern of mine—that I did not explore in my speech because I was conscious of its length. As has been pointed out, a speech has been given previously that was written by artificial intelligence, as has a question in Parliament. We politicians rely on academic research and on the Library. We also google and meet people to inform our discussions and debates. I will keep going on about my Turing clause—which connects to the hon. Gentleman’s point—because I am concerned that if we do not have something like that to highlight a deception, there is a risk that politicians will go into debates or votes that affect the government of this country having been deceived—potentially on purpose, by bad actors. That is a real risk, which is why there needs to be transparency. We need something crystal clear that says, “This is deceptive content” or “This has been produced or informed by AI”, to ensure the right and true decisions are being made based on actual fact. That would cover all the issues that have been raised today. Does the hon. Member share that view?
Artificial Intelligence and the Labour Market
Proceeding contribution from
Dean Russell
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 26 April 2023.
It occurred during Debate on Artificial Intelligence and the Labour Market.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
731 c402WH Session
2022-23Chamber / Committee
Westminster HallSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-08-01 15:17:59 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-04-26/23042637000080
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-04-26/23042637000080
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-04-26/23042637000080