Friday 5 July 2024 - Keir Starmer is the new Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and his Labour party have secured a majority. In a year in which 49% of the global population will have, or will be, casting a vote, the threat of AI and cybersecurity is (or should be) front and centre of all manifestos. The Conservative government had already outlined its desire to place the UK as a leading player in the race for AI development and regulation by hosting the very first AI Safety Summit, held in Bletchley Park. Now, what have Starmer and Labour said about AI, cybersecurity and regulation? Let’s take a look.
It has been 14 years since the last Labour government, and in those 14 years, we have entered a new society, a new world. At the heart of this change is the rapid development and increasing proliferation of technology (including, but not exclusively, AI) across various sectors including our healthcare. At bleepDigital, we have reported various case studies of patient cases where digital medical devices can malfunction, or where biases can become entrenched in algorithms and risk reifying existing harms for marginalised communities. We have also investigated the importance of robust and transparent regulation to maintain the privacy and rights of patients, particularly concerning their health data. As new technologies instigate innovation, disruption inevitably follows, and it is imperative that the new Labour government remains cognisant of the threat of unregulated AI-powered technologies, alongside their economic potential.
In the past, Starmer has said that, "a Labour government would depart from the government’s AI strategy and bring in stronger regulation”, as reported by Politico. Throughout Labour’s manifesto, whilst regulation features, it seems that priority is given to ensuring a "pro-business environment with a competition and regulatory framework”, with further emphasis that any regulation should support "innovation, investment, and high-quality jobs.” This ambition to maintain a fine balance between (much needed) regulation and room for innovation and wealth creation is exemplified throughout the Labour Party’s manifesto. In what amounts to a surprisingly limited contribution to their political ambitions, Labour have pledged to "spearhead the creation of new data centres on green-belt land” in order “to address a lack of capacity for the AI-driven data boom”.
Data will be a key driver of the ‘AI revolution’, and it is our personal information and activity that enables Large Language Models and other Machine Learning technologies to develop. Yet, besides developing capacity for storing data, it is vital that we build the infrastructure to ensure ethical and transparent usage of our data by technological companies. In our conversation with The Light Collective founder Andrea Drowning, we highlighted the dangers that unregulated data can cause for patients, in terms of their privacy rights and in creating unbalanced relationships with medical professionals and companies.
Further evidence of Labour’s business-leaning aspirations reside in Labour’s pledge to create a Regulatory Innovation Office whose overarching aim is to “help regulators to update regulation, speed up approval timelines and co-ordinate issues that span existing boundaries”. As reported by Raconteur, the party had previously described this office as a ''pro-innovation body” designed to “set targets for tech regulators, end uncertainty for businesses, turbocharge output, and boost economic growth’”.
we believe that any regulation must embark on a ‘patient safety first’ path that effectively counter-balances the accrued power and influence of Big Tech companies, including the group known as MAMAA (Meta, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Alphabet). Furthermore, any regulation should uphold and guarantee the ability for current and former AI workers to safely articulate and disseminate their concerns about AI advancement.
We acknowledge that Labour have pledged to "ensure the safe development and use of AI models by introducing binding regulation on the handful of companies developing the most powerful AI models and by banning the creation of sexually explicit deepfakes.” However, we believe that any regulation must embark on a ‘patient safety first’ path that effectively counter-balances the accrued power and influence of Big Tech companies, including the group known as MAMAA (Meta, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Alphabet). Furthermore, any regulation should uphold and guarantee the ability for current and former AI workers to safely articulate and disseminate their concerns about AI advancement.
Interestingly, and despite considerable attention dedicated towards national security and strengthening the country’s defence capabilities, little attention is given to cybersecurity. It seems that Labour’s strategy towards malicious actors does not extend beyond a "Strategic Defence Review in Labour’s first year of government” that "will assess the threat of cyber attacks but also of misinformation campaigns which seek to subvert our democracy”. This is despite a growing number of ransomware and cyber attacks targeting key national infrastructure in healthcare and beyond, leading the UK to become the third most targeted nation for cyber attacks according to Progressive Britain.
Additional interesting segments of the manifesto include Labour’s assurance that coroners “will be empowered to access data held by technology companies after a child’s death”. As described in one of bleepDigital’s articles, existing post-mortem practices in the UK often fail to account for the evolving implanted and interconnected digital technologies that may be pertinent to an individual’s death. With the rise of citizen biohacking, smart implants, and the MedTech industry, death aftercare urgently needs a digital update in order to ensure all relevant information is captured when assessing deaths, especially in suspicious cases that are overseen by the coronial service. Labour’s move to empower coroners to integrate digital information within standard practices is an encouraging step for ensuring NHS practices stay up to date with our evolving society.
Finally, despite the increasing integration of AI in healthcare, through clinical technologies and medical devices, Labour’s mention of AI and the NHS is limited to their pledge to "harness the power of technologies like AI to transform the speed and accuracy of diagnostic services”. Seemingly, this technology is limited to providing our services with “state of the art scanners with embedded AI” and the intention to "double the number of CT and MRI scanners, allowing the NHS to catch cancer and other conditions earlier”.
Whilst manifesto’s remain a broad outline of a party’s tenure, it does provide small insights into the priorities of a ruling government. In a time where our relationship with technology is evolving, fast, governments are falling behind in the race to adequately regulate its proliferation amongst our services, particularly in healthcare. We hope that as evidence of the complexity of biotech syndromes and cyber security frailties mount that Labour’s government instigate the transparent and ethical regulation needed to secure our safety.
Comments